20-F 1 argx-20191231x20f.htm 20-F

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 20-F

(Mark One)

☐ | REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OR (g) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

OR

☒ | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019

OR

☐ | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from to

OR

☐ | SHELL COMPANY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Date of event requiring this shell company report

Commission file number 001-38097

ARGENX SE
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter and translation of Registrant’s name into English)

The Netherlands
(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

Willemstraat 5 4811 AH, Breda, the Netherlands
(Address of principal executive offices)

Tim Van Hauwermeiren argenx BV Industriepark Zwijnaarde 7, Building C 9052 Zwijnaarde (Ghent) Belgium +32 9 310 34 00 TVanHauwermeiren@argenx.com
(Name, telephone, e-mail and/or facsimile number and address of company contact person)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each class: | Trading Symbol: | Name of each exchange on which registered:
American Depositary Shares, each representing one ordinary share with a nominal value of €0.10 per share | ARGX | Nasdaq Global Select Market
Ordinary shares with a nominal value of €0.10 per share * |  | Nasdaq Global Select Market*

* Not for trading, but only in connection with the registration of the American Depositary Shares.

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None.

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act: None.

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report:

As of December 31, 2019 42,761,528 ordinary shares were outstanding, including ordinary shares represented by American Depositary Shares.

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

Yes X No ☐

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Yes ☐ No X

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days:

Yes X No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files):

Yes X No ☐



Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b‑2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer X | Accelerated filer ☐ | Non-accelerated filer ☐ | Emerging growth company ◻

If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards† provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.

† The term “new or revised financial accounting standard” refers to any update issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board to its Accounting Standards Codification after April 5, 2012.

Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:

U.S. GAAP ☐ | International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board X | Other ☐

If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow.

Item 17 ☐ Item 18 ☐

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b‑2 of the Exchange Act).

Yes ☐ No X

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

|  | Page
| PART I | 1
ITEM 1. | IDENTITY OF DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND ADVISERS | 1
ITEM 2. | OFFER STATISTICS AND EXPECTED TIMETABLE | 1
ITEM 3. | KEY INFORMATION | 1
3.A. | SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA | 1
3.B. | CAPITALIZATION AND INDEBTEDNESS | 2
3.C. | REASONS FOR THE OFFER AND USE OF PROCEEDS | 2
3.D. | RISK FACTORS | 2
ITEM 4. | INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY | 60
4.A. | HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMPANY | 60
4.B. | BUSINESS OVERVIEW | 62
4.C. | ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE | 128
4.D. | PROPERTY, PLANTS AND EQUIPMENT | 129
ITEM 4A. | UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS | 129
ITEM 5. | OPERATING AND FINANCIAL REVIEW AND PROSPECTS | 129
5.A. | OPERATING RESULTS | 129
5.B. | LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES | 140
5.C. | RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, PATENTS AND LICENSES | 142
5.D. | TREND INFORMATION | 143
5.E. | OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS | 143
5.F. | TABULAR DISCLOSURE OF CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS | 143
5.G. | SAFE HARBOR | 144
ITEM 6. | DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEES | 144
6.A. | DIRECTORS AND SENIOR MANAGEMENT | 144
6.B. | COMPENSATION | 148
6.C. | BOARD PRACTICES | 158
6.D. | EMPLOYEES | 164
6.E. | SHARE OWNERSHIP | 165
ITEM 7. | MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS | 165
7.A. | MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS | 165
7.B. | RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS | 169
7.C. | INTERESTS OF EXPERTS AND COUNSEL | 171
ITEM 8. | FINANCIAL INFORMATION | 171
8.A. | CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS AND OTHER FINANCIAL INFORMATION | 171
8.B. | SIGNIFICANT CHANGES | 172
ITEM 9. | THE OFFER AND LISTING | 172
9.A. | OFFER AND LISTING DETAILS | 172
9.B. | PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION | 172
9.C. | MARKETS | 172
9.D. | SELLING SHAREHOLDERS | 172
9.E. | DILUTION | 172
9.F. | EXPENSES OF THE ISSUE | 172
ITEM 10. | ADDITIONAL INFORMATION | 172
10.A. | SHARE CAPITAL | 172
10.B. | MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION | 173
10.C. | MATERIAL CONTRACTS | 173
10.D. | EXCHANGE CONTROLS | 173

ii

Table of Contents

10.E. | TAXATION | 173
10.F. | DIVIDENDS AND PAYING AGENTS | 196
10.G. | STATEMENT BY EXPERTS | 196
10.H. | DOCUMENTS ON DISPLAY | 196
10.I. | SUBSIDIARY INFORMATION | 197
ITEM 11. | QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK | 197
ITEM 12. | DESCRIPTION OF SECURITIES OTHER THAN EQUITY SECURITIES | 198
12.A. | DEBT SECURITIES | 198
12.B. | WARRANTS AND RIGHTS | 198
12.C. | OTHER SECURITIES | 198
12.D. | AMERICAN DEPOSITARY SHARES | 198
| PART II | 201
ITEM 13. | DEFAULTS, DIVIDEND ARREARAGES AND DELINQUENCIES | 201
ITEM 14. | MATERIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE RIGHTS OF SECURITY HOLDERS AND USE OF PROCEEDS | 201
ITEM 15. | CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES | 201
ITEM 16. | [RESERVED] | 203
ITEM 16A. | AUDIT COMMITTEE FINANCIAL EXPERT | 203
ITEM 16B. | CODE OF ETHICS | 203
ITEM 16C. | PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES | 204
ITEM 16D. | EXEMPTIONS FROM THE LISTING STANDARDS FOR AUDIT COMMITTEES | 204
ITEM 16E. | PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES BY THE ISSUER AND AFFILIATED PURCHASERS | 205
ITEM 16F. | CHANGE IN REGISTRANT’S CERTIFYING ACCOUNTANT | 205
ITEM 16G. | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE | 205
ITEM 16H. | MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURE | 206
| PART III | 207
ITEM 17. | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | 207
ITEM 18. | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS | 207
ITEM 19. | EXHIBITS | 207

iii

Table of Contents

Cautionary Statement with Respect to Forward-Looking Statements

This annual report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, that are based on our management’s beliefs and assumptions and on information currently available to our management. All statements other than present and historical facts and conditions contained in this annual report, including statements regarding our future results of operations and financial positions, business strategy, plans and our objectives for future operations, are forward-looking statements. When used in this annual report, the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “can,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “is designed to,” “may,” “might,” “will,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “objective,” “should,” or the negative of these and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about:

| · |  | the initiation, timing, progress and results of clinical trials of our product candidates, including statements regarding when results of the trials will be made public;

| · |  | the potential attributes and benefits of our product candidates and their competitive position with respect to other alternative treatments;

| · |  | our ability to advance product candidates into, and successfully complete, clinical trials;

| · |  | our plans related to the commercialization of our product candidates, if approved;

| · |  | the anticipated pricing and reimbursement of our product candidates, if approved;

| · |  | the timing or likelihood of regulatory filings and approvals for any product candidates;

| · |  | our ability to establish sales, marketing and distribution capabilities for any of our product candidates that achieve regulatory approval;

| · |  | our regulatory strategy and our ability to establish and maintain manufacturing arrangements for our product candidates;

| · |  | the scope and duration of protection we are able to establish and maintain for intellectual property rights covering our product candidates, platform and technology;

| · |  | our estimates regarding expenses, future revenues, capital requirements and our needs for additional financing;

| · |  | the rate and degree of market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved;

| · |  | the potential benefits of our current collaborations;

| · |  | our plans and ability to enter into collaborations for additional programs or product candidates;

| · |  | the effect of COVID-19 on our business; and

| · |  | the impact of government laws and regulations on our business.

You should refer to the section of this annual report titled “Item 3.D.—Risk Factors” for a discussion of important factors that may cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. As a result of these factors, we cannot assure you that the forward-looking statements in this annual report will prove to be accurate. Furthermore, if our forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not regard these

iv

Table of Contents

statements as a representation or warranty by us or any other person that we will achieve our objectives and plans in any specified time frame or at all. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

You should read this annual report and the documents that we reference in this annual report and have filed as exhibits to the annual report completely and with the understanding that our actual future results may be materially different from what we expect. We qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements.

Information regarding market and industry statistics contained in this annual report is included based on information available to us that we believe is accurate. Forecasts and other forward looking information obtained from this available information is subject to the same qualifications and the additional uncertainties accompanying any estimates of future market size, revenue and market acceptance of products and services.

v

Table of Contents

PART I

ITEM 1. IDENTITY OF DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND ADVISERS

Not applicable.

ITEM 2. OFFER STATISTICS AND EXPECTED TIMETABLE

Not applicable.

ITEM 3. KEY INFORMATION

A. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

Our consolidated audited financial statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards, or IFRS, as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, or IASB. We derived the selected consolidated statements of profit and loss and other comprehensive income, selected condensed consolidated statements of financial position and selected condensed consolidated statements of cash flow as of and for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 from our consolidated audited financial statements, included herein. Our selected consolidated statement of profit and loss and other comprehensive income, selected condensed consolidated statement of financial position and selected condensed consolidated statement of cash flow as and for the year ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 have been extracted from our consolidated audited financial statements, which are not included herein. This data should be read together with, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to, “Item 5—Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” as well as our financial statements and notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this report. Our historical results for any prior period are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected in any future period.

|  | Year ended
|  | December 31,
|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017 |  | 2016 |  |  | 2015
|  | (In thousands, except share and per share data)
Consolidated statement of profit and loss and other comprehensive income: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Revenue |  | € | 69,783 |  | € | 21,482 |  | € | 36,415 |  | € | 14,713 |  | € | 6,854
Other operating income |  |  | 12,801 |  |  | 7,749 |  |  | 4,841 |  |  | 2,439 |  |  | 3,101
Research and development expenses |  |  | (197,665) |  |  | (83,609) |  |  | (51,740) |  |  | (31,557) |  |  | (20,635)
Selling, general and administrative expenses |  |  | (64,569) |  |  | (27,471) |  |  | (12,448) |  |  | (7,011) |  |  | (4,925)
Change in fair value on financials assets |  |  | 1,096 |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | —
Operating loss |  |  | (178,554) |  |  | (81,849) |  |  | (22,932) |  |  | (21,416) |  |  | (15,605)
Financial income |  |  | 14,399 |  |  | 3,694 |  |  | 1,250 |  |  | 73 |  |  | 112
Financial expense |  |  | (124) |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | —
Exchange gains/(losses) |  |  | 6,066 |  |  | 12,308 |  |  | (5,797) |  |  | (31) |  |  | 181
Loss before taxes |  |  | (158,213) |  |  | (65,847) |  |  | (27,479) |  |  | (21,374) |  |  | (15,312)
Income tax expense |  |  | (4,752) |  |  | (794) |  |  | (597) |  |  | — |  |  | —
Loss for the year and total comprehensive loss |  | € | (162,965) |  | € | (66,641) |  | € | (28,076) |  | € | (21,374) |  | € | (15,312)
Weighted average number of shares outstanding |  |  | 38,619,121 |  |  | 33,419,356 |  |  | 24,609,536 |  |  | 18,820,612 |  |  | 15,734,007
Basic and diluted loss per share (in €) |  | € | (4.22) |  | € | (1.99) |  | € | (1.14) |  | € | (1.14) |  | € | (0.97)

1

Table of Contents

|  | As of December 31,
|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017 |  | 2016 |  | 2015
|  | (In thousands)
Condensed consolidated statement of financial position: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Cash, cash equivalents and current financial assets |  | € | 1,335,821 |  | € | 564,569 |  | € | 359,775 |  | € | 96,728 |  | € | 42,327
Total assets |  |  | 1,433,339 |  |  | 578,458 |  |  | 370,908 |  |  | 105,772 |  |  | 45,962
Deferred revenue — current and non-current |  |  | 290,370 |  |  | 2,161 |  |  | 10,070 |  |  | 30,206 |  |  | 4,141
Total liabilities |  |  | 382,593 |  |  | 40,063 |  |  | 25,977 |  |  | 42,398 |  |  | 8,684
Share capital |  |  | 4,276 |  |  | 3,597 |  |  | 3,217 |  |  | 2,012 |  |  | 1,580
Share premium |  |  | 1,308,539 |  |  | 673,454 |  |  | 430,518 |  |  | 126,358 |  |  | 82,169
Total equity |  |  | 1,050,746 |  |  | 538,395 |  |  | 344,931 |  |  | 63,374 |  |  | 37,278

|  | As of December 31,
|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017 |  | 2016 |  | 2015
|  | (In thousands)
Condensed consolidated statement of cash flows: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of the period |  | € | 281,040 |  | € | 190,867 |  | € | 89,897 |  | € | 35,514 |  | € | 32,180
Net cash flows (used in) / from operating activities |  |  | 134,584 |  |  | (53,839) |  |  | (36,546) |  |  | 10,599 |  |  | (13,897)
Net cash flows (used in) / from investing activities |  |  | (744,338) |  |  | (107,542) |  |  | (162,052) |  |  | (806) |  |  | 16,812
Net cash flows (used in) / from financing activities |  |  | 659,359 |  |  | 244,671 |  |  | 305,365 |  |  | 44,621 |  |  | 238
Effect of exchange rate differences on cash and cash equivalents |  |  | 637 |  |  | 6,883 |  |  | (5,797) |  |  | (31) |  |  | 181
Cash and cash equivalents at end of the period |  | € | 331,282 |  | € | 281,040 |  | € | 190,867 |  | € | 89,897 |  | € | 35,514

B. CAPITALIZATION AND INDEBTEDNESS

Not applicable.

C. REASONS FOR THE OFFER AND USE OF PROCEEDS

Not applicable.

D. RISK FACTORS

Our business faces significant risks. You should carefully consider all of the information set forth in this annual report and in our other filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, including the following risk factors which we face and which are faced by our industry. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected if any of these risks occurs. This report also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. See “Cautionary Statement with Respect to Forward-Looking Statements.” Our actual results could differ materially and adversely from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors including the risks described below and elsewhere in this annual report and our other SEC filings. See “Cautionary Statement with Respect to Forward-Looking Statements” above.

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

We are a clinical‑stage biopharmaceutical company and have incurred significant losses since our inception. We expect to incur losses for the foreseeable future and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

We are a clinical‑stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history. We do not currently have any approved products and have never generated any revenue from product sales. Since our inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. We incurred losses for the year and total comprehensive losses of €66.6 million and €163.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2019, respectively. As of December 31, 2019, we had accumulated losses of €332.6 million. Our losses resulted principally from costs incurred in research and development, preclinical testing, clinical development of our product candidates as well as costs incurred for research programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. In addition, we expect to continue to incur significant costs associated with our listings in the United States and in

2

Table of Contents

Europe. In the future, we intend to continue to conduct research and development, preclinical testing, clinical trials and regulatory compliance activities and we intend to continue our efforts to establish a sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure. These expenses, together with anticipated general and administrative expenses, will result in incurring further significant losses for at least the next several years. Our losses, among other things, will continue to cause our working capital and shareholders’ equity to decrease. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:

| · |  | execute the Phase 3 clinical trials of efgartigimod in myasthenia gravis, or MG, in primary immune thrombocytopoenia, or ITP, and in pemphigus vulgaris, or PV;

| · |  | complete the Phase 2 clinical trials of efgartigimod in PV and launch a Phase 2 clinical trial in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, or CIDP;

| · |  | complete the Phase 2 clinical trials of cusatuzumab in acute myeloid leukemia, or AML and high‑risk myelodysplastic syndrome, or MDS;

| · |  | jointly develop and commercialize cusatuzumab with Janssen as per the collaboration agreement signed in December 2018;

| · |  | continue the research and development of our other clinical‑ and preclinical‑stage product candidates and discovery stage programs;

| · |  | seek to enhance our technology platform and discover and develop additional product candidates;

| · |  | seek regulatory approvals for any product candidates that successfully complete clinical trials;

| · |  | establish a sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure and scale‑up manufacturing capabilities to commercialize any product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval;

| · |  | maintain, expand and protect our intellectual property portfolio, including litigation costs associated with defending against alleged patent infringement claims;

| · |  | add clinical, scientific, operational, financial and management information systems and personnel, including personnel to support our product development and potential future commercialization efforts; and

| · |  | experience any delays or encounter any issues relating to any of the above, including failed studies, ambiguous trial results, safety issues or other regulatory challenges.

To become and remain profitable, we must succeed in developing and eventually commercializing products that generate significant revenue. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing preclinical testing and clinical trials of our product candidates, discovering and developing additional product candidates, obtaining regulatory approval for any product candidates that successfully complete clinical trials, establishing manufacturing and marketing capabilities and ultimately selling any products for which we may obtain regulatory approval. We are only in the preliminary stages of most of these activities. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate revenue that is significant enough to achieve profitability.

Even if we do generate product royalties or product sales, we may never achieve or sustain profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to achieve or sustain profitability would depress the market price of the ADSs and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, diversify our product offerings or continue our operations. A decline in the market price of the ADSs also could cause you to lose all or a part of your investment.

3

Table of Contents

Substantial additional funding may be required in order to complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates, but may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. Failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed may force us to delay, limit or terminate certain of our product development or research operations.

To date, we have funded our operations through public and private placements of equity securities, upfront, milestone and expense reimbursement payments received from our collaborators, funding from governmental bodies and interest income from the investment of our cash, cash equivalents and financial assets. We expect to require additional funding in the future to sufficiently finance our operations and advance development of our product candidates.

Our future capital requirements for efgartigimod, cusatuzumab or our clinical and preclinical programs will depend on many factors, including:

| · |  | the progress, timing and completion of preclinical testing and clinical trials for our current or any future product candidates;

| · |  | the number of potential new product candidates we identify and decide to develop;

| · |  | the costs involved in growing our organization to the size needed to allow for the research, development and potential commercialization of our current or any future product candidates;

| · |  | the costs involved in filing patent applications and maintaining and enforcing patents or defending against claims or infringements raised by third parties;

| · |  | the maintenance of our existing collaboration agreements and the entry into new collaboration agreements;

| · |  | the time and costs involved in obtaining regulatory approval for our product candidates and any delays we may encounter as a result of evolving regulatory requirements or adverse results with respect to any of our product candidates;

| · |  | selling and marketing activities undertaken in connection with the potential commercialization of our current or any future product candidates, if approved, and costs involved in the creation of an effective sales and marketing organization; and

| · |  | the amount of revenues, if any, we may derive either directly or in the form of royalty payments from future sales of our product candidates, if approved.

We expect that the costs of development and commercialization will significantly increase due to the extended product development roadmap for cusatuzumab as part of our collaboration with Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or Janssen. Although this collaboration agreement provides a joint decision process to approve the development plan as well as the budget, we cannot control the actual amounts spent within such approved budget and we cannot control or guarantee that these funds are spent in the most efficient way.

Our ability to raise additional funds will depend on financial, economic and market conditions and other factors, over which we may have no or limited control. As a result, we will need additional financing to support our continuing operations. Until such time as we can generate significant revenue from product sales, if ever, we expect to finance our operations through a combination of public or private equity or debt financings or other sources, which may include collaborations with third parties. Our ability to raise additional funds will depend on financial, economic and market conditions and other factors, over which we may have no or limited control. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. The inability for us to raise capital as and when needed would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our

4

Table of Contents

business strategy and as a result, we may be forced to delay, reduce or terminate the development or commercialization of all or part of our research programs or product candidates or we may be unable to take advantage of future business opportunities, as desire, all of which may have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to holders of our ordinary shares or ADSs restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our technologies or product candidates.

In order to further advance development of our product candidates, discover additional product candidates and pursue our other business objectives, we will need to seek additional funds.

We cannot guarantee that future financing will be available in sufficient amounts or on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. Moreover, the terms of any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of holders of our ordinary shares or the ADSs and the issuance of additional securities, whether equity or debt, by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of the ADSs to decline. The sale of additional equity or convertible securities would dilute all of our existing shareholders and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a holder of ADSs. The incurrence of indebtedness could result in increased fixed payment obligations and we may be required to agree to certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. We could also be required to seek funds through arrangements with collaborators or others at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable and we may be required to relinquish rights to some of our technologies or product candidates or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us, any of which may have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and prospects. Further, any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from its day‑to‑day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates.

Our limited operating history may make it difficult for you to evaluate the success of our business to date and to assess our future viability.

Since our inception in 2008, we have invested most of our resources in developing our product candidates, building our intellectual property portfolio, developing our supply chain, conducting business planning, raising capital and providing general and administrative support for these operations. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a commercial‑scale product or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. In addition, given our limited operating history, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown factors in achieving our business objectives. If we are successful at completing the approval process for one of our product candidates, we may consider transitioning from our current research and development focus to focusing on commercializing our products. We may not be successful in such a transition or may incur greater costs than expected, which would materially adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operation. Additionally, we expect our financial condition and operating results to continue to fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Consequently, any predictions you make about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or more experience developing and commercializing antibody‑based drugs.

5

Table of Contents

Risks Related to the Development and Clinical Testing of Our Product Candidates

All of our product candidates are in preclinical, early‑stage clinical or clinical development. Clinical drug development is a lengthy and expensive process with uncertain timelines and uncertain outcomes. If clinical trials of our product candidates are prolonged or delayed, we or our collaborators may be unable to obtain required regulatory approvals, and therefore will be unable to commercialize our product candidates on a timely basis or at all, which will adversely affect our business.

For our clinical trials to succeed and in order to obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to market and sell any of our product candidates, we or our collaborators for such candidates must successfully demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our products are safe, pure and potent or effective in humans. Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process and our future clinical trial results may not be successful.

We may experience delays in our ongoing clinical trials and we do not know whether planned clinical trials will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll patients on time or be completed on schedule, if at all.

Clinical trials can be delayed, suspended, or terminated for a large variety of reasons outside our control, including the following:

| · |  | delays in or failure to obtain regulatory approval to commence a trial, including as a result of circumstances beyond our control, such as the partial shutdown of operations at U.S. governmental agencies involved in granting necessary approvals;

| · |  | delays in or failure to reach agreement on acceptable terms with prospective contract research organizations, or CROs, and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and trial sites;

| · |  | delays in or failure to obtain institutional review board, or IRB, or ethics committee approval at each site;

| · |  | delays in or failure to recruit suitable patients to participate in a trial;

| · |  | failure to have patients complete a trial or return for post‑treatment follow‑up;

| · |  | clinical sites deviating from the trial protocol or dropping out of a trial;

| · |  | adding new clinical trial sites;

| · |  | manufacturing sufficient quantities of product candidate for use in clinical trials;

| · |  | third‑party actions claiming infringement by our product candidates in clinical trials and obtaining injunctions interfering with our progress;

| · |  | business interruptions resulting from geo‑political actions, including war and terrorism, or natural disasters including pandemics, earthquakes, typhoons, floods and fires;

| · |  | safety or tolerability concerns could cause us or our collaborators, as applicable, to suspend or terminate a trial if we or our collaborators find that the participants are being exposed to unacceptable health risks;

| · |  | changes in regulatory requirements, policies and guidelines;

6

Table of Contents

| · |  | lower than anticipated retention rates of patients and volunteers in clinical trials;

| · |  | our third‑party research contractors failing to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all;

| · |  | delays in establishing the appropriate dosage levels in clinical trials;

| · |  | the difficulty in certain countries in identifying the sub‑populations that we are trying to treat in a particular trial, which may delay enrollment and reduce the power of a clinical trial to detect statistically significant results; and

| · |  | the quality or stability of the product candidate.

We could encounter delays, for example, if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted or ethics committees, by the Data Review Committee, or DRC, or Data Safety Monitoring Board, or DSMB, for such trial or by the EMA, the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may impose such a suspension or termination or clinical hold due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the EMA, the FDA or other regulatory authorities, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, including those relating to the class to which our product candidates belong, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Significant clinical trial delays could also allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do or shorten any periods during which we have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates and impair our ability to commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates or result in the development of our product candidates being stopped early.

Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with the FDA, the EMA and other applicable regulatory authorities’ legal requirements and regulations, and are subject to oversight by these governmental agencies and IRBs at the medical institutions where the clinical trials are conducted or ethics committees. In addition, clinical trials must be conducted with supplies of our product candidates produced under current good manufacturing practices, or cGMP, requirements and other regulations. Furthermore, we rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials and while we have agreements governing their committed activities, we have limited influence over their actual performance. We depend on our collaborators and on clinical investigators, medical institutions and CROs to conduct our clinical trials in compliance with Good Clinical Practice, or GCP, requirements. To the extent our collaborators or the CROs or investigators fail to enroll participants for our clinical trials, fail to conduct the study to GCP standards or are delayed for a significant time in the execution of trials, including achieving full enrollment, we may be affected by increased costs, program delays or both, which may harm our business. In addition, clinical trials that are conducted in countries outside the European Union and the United States may subject us to further delays and expenses as a result of increased shipment costs, additional regulatory requirements and the engagement of non‑European Union and non‑U.S. CROs, as well as expose us to risks associated with clinical investigators who are unknown to the FDA or the EMA, and different standards of diagnosis, screening and medical care.

7

Table of Contents

Preclinical drug development is uncertain. Some or all of our preclinical programs may experience delays or may never advance to clinical trials, which would adversely affect our ability to obtain regulatory approvals or commercialize these product candidates on a timely basis or at all, which would have an adverse effect on our business.

In order to obtain FDA or EMA approval to market a new biological product we must demonstrate proof of safety, purity and potency or efficacy in humans. To meet these requirements we will have to conduct adequate and well‑controlled clinical trials. Before we can commence clinical trials for a product candidate, we must complete extensive preclinical testing and studies that support Investigational New Drug applications, or INDs, in the United States, or a Clinical Trial Authorization Applications, or CTAs, in Europe. We cannot be certain of the timely completion or outcome of our preclinical testing and studies and cannot predict if the FDA or EMA will accept our proposed clinical programs or if the outcome of our preclinical testing and studies will ultimately support the further development of these product candidates. Thus, we cannot be sure that we will be able to submit INDs or CTAs for our preclinical programs on the timelines we expect, if at all, and we cannot be sure that submission of INDs or CTAs will result in the FDA or EMA allowing clinical trials to begin.

Conducting preclinical testing is a lengthy, time‑consuming and expensive process. The length of time may vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use of the product candidate, and often can be several years or more per product candidate. Delays associated with product candidates for which we are directly conducting preclinical testing and studies may cause us to incur additional operating expenses. Moreover, we may continue to be affected by delays associated with the preclinical testing and studies of certain product candidates conducted by our potential partners over which we have no control. The commencement and rate of completion of preclinical testing and studies for a product candidate may be delayed by many factors, including, for example:

| · |  | the inability to generate sufficient preclinical or other in vivo or in vitro data to support the initiation of clinical studies;

| · |  | delays in reaching a consensus with regulatory agencies on study design; and

| · |  | the FDA or EMA not allowing us to rely on previous findings of safety and efficacy for other similar but approved products and published scientific literature.

Moreover, even if clinical trials do begin for these preclinical programs, our development efforts may not be successful, and clinical trials that we conduct or that third parties conduct on our behalf may not demonstrate sufficient safety, purity and potency or efficacy to obtain the requisite regulatory approvals for any of our product candidates or product candidates employing our technology. Even if we obtain positive results from preclinical studies or initial clinical trials, we may not achieve the same success in future trials.

The results of preclinical studies and early‑stage clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later‑stage clinical trials. Initial success in our ongoing clinical trials may not be indicative of results obtained when these trials are completed or in later stage trials.

Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that any of our clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support further clinical development of any of our product candidates. There is a high failure rate for drugs and biologics proceeding through clinical trials. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in clinical development even after achieving promising results in earlier studies, and any such setbacks in our clinical development could have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.

8

Table of Contents

Interim, topline and preliminary data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.

From time to time, we may publish interim, topline or preliminary data from our clinical trials. Preliminary and interim data from our clinical trials may change as more patient data become available. Preliminary or interim data from our clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of final results. Preliminary and interim data are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues, more patient data become available and we issue our final clinical trial report. Interim, topline and preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, preliminary and interim data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Material adverse changes in the final data compared to the interim data could significantly harm our business prospects.

The regulatory approval processes of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the European Medicines Agency and comparable foreign authorities are lengthy, time consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be substantially harmed.

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA, the EMA and comparable foreign authorities is unpredictable but typically takes many years, if obtained at all, following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We have not obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate and it is possible that none of our existing product candidates or any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain regulatory approval.

Our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:

| · |  | the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials, including the size of our clinical trials or the doses tested;

| · |  | we may be unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities that a product candidate is safe, pure and potent or effective for its proposed indication;

| · |  | the results of clinical trials may not meet the level of statistical significance required by the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for approval;

| · |  | we may be unable to demonstrate that a product candidate’s clinical and other benefits outweigh its safety risks;

| · |  | the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials or may require us to test additional dose regimens of our product candidates;

| · |  | the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may not be sufficient to support the submission of a Biologics License Application, or BLA, to the FDA or other submission or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States, the European Union or elsewhere;

9

Table of Contents

| · |  | the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may find deficiencies with or fail to approve the manufacturing processes or facilities of third party manufacturers with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies;

| · |  | the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may fail to approve the companion diagnostics we contemplate developing with partners; and

| · |  | the approval policies or regulations of the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may significantly change in a manner rendering our clinical data insufficient for approval.

This lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of future clinical trial results may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects. The FDA, the EMA and other comparable foreign authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process, and determining when or whether regulatory approval will be obtained for any of our product candidates. Even if we believe the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA, the EMA or any other regulatory authority.

In addition, even if we were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any of our product candidates for fewer or more limited indications than we request, may not approve the price we intend to charge for our products, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post marketing clinical trials, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates.

Even if our product candidates obtain regulatory approval, we will be subject to ongoing obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. Additionally, our product candidates, if approved, could be subject to labeling and other restrictions and market withdrawal and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our products.

If the FDA, the EMA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority approves any of our product candidates, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for the product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with cGMPs and GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct post approval, all of which may result in significant expense and limit our ability to commercialize such products. In addition, any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate.

Our product candidates are classified as biologics in the United States and, therefore, can only be sold if we obtain an approved, or licensed, BLA from the FDA. The holder of a BLA is obligated to monitor and report adverse events and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the BLA. The holder of a BLA must also submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. Failure to comply with a BLA or any other ongoing regulatory obligation may result in suspension of approval to manufacture or distribute the relevant product, as well as fines or imprisonment for violations.

If there are changes in the application of legislation, regulations or regulatory policies, or if problems are discovered with a product or our manufacture of a product, or if we or one of our distributors, licensees or co marketers fails to comply with regulatory requirements, the regulators could take various actions. These include imposing fines on us, imposing restrictions on the product or its manufacture and requiring us to recall or remove

10

Table of Contents

the product from the market. The regulators could also suspend or withdraw our marketing authorizations, requiring us to conduct additional clinical trials, change our product labeling or submit additional applications for marketing authorization. If any of these events occurs, our ability to sell such product may be impaired, and we may incur substantial additional expense to comply with regulatory requirements, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our product candidates may have serious adverse, undesirable or unacceptable side effects which may delay or prevent marketing approval. If such side effects are identified during the development of our product candidates or following approval, if any, we may need to abandon our development of such product candidates, the commercial profile of any approved label may be limited, or we may be subject to other significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any.

Undesirable side effects that may be caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA, the EMA or other comparable foreign authorities. While our preclinical and clinical studies for our product candidates to date have generally been well tolerated from a risk‑benefit perspective, we have observed adverse events and treatment emergent adverse events in our clinical studies to date, and we may see additional adverse events and treatment emergent adverse events, or TEAEs, in our ongoing and future trials, which may be more serious than those observed to date, and as a result, our ongoing and future trials may be negatively impacted.

The results of future clinical studies may show that our product candidates cause undesirable or unacceptable side effects or even death. In such an event, our trials could be suspended or terminated and the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. The drug‑related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, results of operation and financial condition significantly. Further, because all of our product candidates and preclinical programs, other than efgartigimod, are based on our SIMPLE Antibody TM platform, any adverse safety or efficacy findings related to any product candidate or preclinical program may adversely impact the viability of our other product candidates or preclinical programs.

Additionally, if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval and we or others later identify undesirable or unacceptable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

| · |  | regulatory authorities may withdraw approvals of such products and require us to take our approved product off the market;

| · |  | regulatory authorities may require the addition of labeling statements, specific warnings, a black box warning, a contraindication or field alerts to physicians and pharmacies;

| · |  | regulatory authorities may require a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients, or that we implement a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, program to ensure that the benefits of the product outweigh its risks;

| · |  | we may be required to change the way the product is administered, conduct additional clinical trials or change the labeling of the product;

| · |  | we may be subject to limitations on how we may promote the product;

| · |  | sales of the product may decrease significantly;

| · |  | we may be subject to litigation or product liability claims; and

11

Table of Contents

| · |  | our reputation may suffer.

Any of these events could prevent us, our collaborators or our potential future partners from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product or could substantially increase commercialization costs and expenses, which in turn could delay or prevent us from generating significant revenue from the sale of our products.

We face significant competition for our drug discovery and development efforts, and if we do not compete effectively, our commercial opportunities will be reduced or eliminated. We may not be successful in our efforts to use and expand our SIMPLE Antibody TM platform, our NHance® and ABDEG TM technologies, or the licensed POTELLIGENT® technology, to build a pipeline of product candidates and develop marketable products due to significant competition and technological change, which could limit or eliminate the market opportunity for our product candidates and technology platforms.

The market for pharmaceutical products is highly competitive. Our competitors include many established pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, universities and other research or commercial institutions, many of which have substantially greater financial, research and development resources than we have. Large pharmaceutical companies, in particular, have extensive experience in clinical testing, obtaining regulatory approvals, recruiting patients and manufacturing pharmaceutical products. Smaller and early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, the development of our products. The fields in which we operate are characterized by rapid technological change and innovation. There can be no assurance that our competitors are not currently developing, or will not in the future develop, technologies and products that are equally or more effective or are more economically attractive than any of our current or future technology or product. Competing products or technology platforms may gain faster or greater market acceptance than our products or technology platforms and medical advances or rapid technological development by competitors may result in our product candidates or technology platforms becoming non‑competitive or obsolete before we are able to recover our research and development and commercialization expenses. If we, our product candidates or our technology platforms do not compete effectively, it is likely to have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operation.

Competition in the autoimmune field is intense and involves multiple monoclonal antibodies, other biologics and small molecules either already marketed or in development by many different companies including large pharmaceutical companies such as AbbVie Inc. (Humira/rheumatoid arthritis); Amgen Inc. (Enbrel/rheumatoid arthritis); Biogen, Inc. (Tysabri/multiple sclerosis); GlaxoSmithKline plc, or GSK, (Benlysta/lupus); F. Hoffman-La Roche AG, or Roche (Rituxan/often used off label); and Janssen (Remicade/rheumatoid arthritis and Stelara/psoriasis). In some cases, these competitors are also our collaborators. In addition, these and other pharmaceutical companies have monoclonal antibodies or other biologics in clinical development for the treatment of autoimmune diseases. In addition to the current standard of care, we are aware that Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is selling Soliris for the treatment of adult patients with generalized MG who are anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody positive and that GSK; Roche; Novartis AG; CSL Behring; Grifols, S. A.; BioMarin Pharmaceutical, Inc.; Curavac; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; UCB S.A.; Ra Pharmaceuticals; and Momenta Pharmaceuticals, among others, are developing drugs that may have utility for the treatment of MG. We are aware that Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Dova Pharmaceuticals; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Immunomedics; Protalex, Inc.; Principia Biopharma and others are developing drugs that may have utility for the treatment of ITP. We are aware that Roche is selling Rituxan for the treatment of moderate to severe PV and Principia, Alexion and others are developing drugs that may have utility for the treatment of PV. Furthermore, we are aware of competing products specifically targeting FcRn and being developed by UCB S. A.; Momenta, Inc.; Alexion; Immunovant; and Affibody.

Competition in the leukemia and lymphoma space is intense, with many compounds in clinical trials by large multinational pharmaceutical companies and specialized biotech companies. Rituxan (Roche), Adcetris

12

Table of Contents

(Seattle Genetics, Inc. / Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, Ltd.), Darzalex (Janssen) and Poteligeo (Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.) are some examples of monoclonal antibodies approved for the treatment of Hodgkin's lymphoma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, multiple myeloma or other blood cancers. We are aware of AML drugs recently approved by the FDA, such as Daurismo (Pfizer), Mylotarg (Pfizer), Rydapt (Amgen), Vyxos (Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) and IDHIFA (Agios, Inc. and Celgene). In addition, we are aware of a number of other companies with development stage programs that may compete with cusatuzumab in the future, if it is approved. We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new treatments enter the market and advanced technologies become available.

There are several monoclonal antibody drug discovery companies that may compete with us in the search for novel therapeutic antibody targets, including Adimab LLC; Merus N.V.; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Xencor Inc. and MorphoSys AG. We are aware that a product candidate in development by Scholar Rock, Inc. may compete with ABBV-151 (formerly named ARGX-115) and a product candidate in development by Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. may compete with ARGX-116, if they are approved.

We depend on enrollment of patients in our clinical trials for our product candidates. If we are unable to enroll patients in our clinical trials, our research and development efforts and business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in our clinical trials is critical to our success. Patient enrollment depends on many factors, including the size and nature of the patient population, eligibility criteria for the trial, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the design of the clinical protocol, the availability of competing clinical trials, the availability of new drugs approved for the indication the clinical trial is investigating, and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the drug being studied in relation to other available therapies. Since some of our product candidates are focused on addressing rare diseases and conditions, there are limited patient pools available to complete our clinical trials in a timely and cost‑effective manner. For example, the number of patients suffering from each of MG; ITP; PV; T‑cell lymphoma, or TCL; and AML, is small and has not been established with precision. If the actual number of patients with these disorders is smaller than we anticipate, we may encounter difficulties in enrolling patients in our clinical trials, thereby delaying or preventing development and approval of our drug candidates. Even once enrolled we may be unable to retain a sufficient number of patients to complete any of our trials.

Furthermore, our efforts to build relationships with patient communities may not succeed, which could result in delays in patient enrollment in our clinical trials. In addition, any negative results we may report in clinical trials of our drug candidate may make it difficult or impossible to recruit and retain patients in other clinical trials of that same drug candidate. Delays in the completion of any clinical trial of our product candidates will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and delay or potentially jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenue. In addition, some of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

Business interruptions resulting from the COVID-19 outbreak or similar public health crises could cause a disruption of the development of our product candidates and adversely impact our business.

Public health crises such as pandemics or similar outbreaks could adversely impact our business. In December 2019, a novel strain of a virus named SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), or coronavirus, which causes coronavirus disease, or COVID-19, was reported to have surfaced in Wuhan, China and has reached multiple other regions and countries, including Europe and the United States. The COVID-19 pandemic is evolving, and to date has led to the implementation of various responses, including government-imposed quarantines, travel restrictions and other public health safety measures.

The continued spread of COVID-19 or other global health matters, such as pandemics, could adversely impact our clinical trials or preclinical studies. For instance, the COVID-19 outbreak could impair our ability to recruit and retain patients and principal investigators and site staff who, as healthcare providers, may have

13

Table of Contents

heightened exposure to COVID-19 if an outbreak occurs in their geography or due to prioritization of hospital resources toward the outbreak and restrictions in travel. Furthermore, some patients may be unwilling to enroll in our trials or be unable to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines or travel restrictions impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services. COVID-19 may also negatively affect the operations of third-party CROs that we rely upon to carry out our clinical trials or the operations of our third-party manufacturers, which could result in delays or disruptions in the supply of our product candidates. Any negative impact COVID-19 has to patient enrollment or treatment or the timing and execution of our clinical trials could cause costly delays to our clinical trial activities, which could adversely affect our ability to obtain regulatory approval for and to commercialize our product candidates, increase our operating expenses and have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

The extent to which COVID-19 impacts our operations or those of our third party partners will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence, such as the duration of the outbreak, new information that may emerge concerning the severity of COVID-19 or the effectiveness of actions to contain COVID-19 or treat its impact, among others. We cannot presently predict the scope and severity of any potential business shutdowns or disruptions. If we or any of the third parties with whom we engage, however, were to experience shutdowns or other business disruptions, our ability to conduct our business in the manner and on the timelines presently planned could be materially and negatively affected, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may become exposed to costly and damaging liability claims, either when testing our product candidates in the clinic or at the commercial stage; and our product liability insurance may not cover all damages from such claims.

We are exposed to potential product liability and professional indemnity risks that are inherent in the research, development, manufacturing, marketing and use of pharmaceutical products. Currently, we have no products that have been approved for commercial sale; however, the current and future use of product candidates by us and our corporate collaborators in clinical trials, and the potential sale of any approved products in the future, may expose us to liability claims. These claims might be made by patients who use the product, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies, our corporate collaborators or others selling such products. Any claims against us, regardless of their merit, could be difficult and costly to defend and could materially adversely affect the market for our product candidates or any prospects for commercialization of our product candidates. Although the clinical trial process is designed to identify and assess potential side effects, it is always possible that a drug, even after regulatory approval, may exhibit unforeseen side effects. If any of our product candidates were to cause adverse side effects during clinical trials or after approval of the product candidate, we may be exposed to substantial liabilities. Physicians and patients may not comply with any warnings that identify known potential adverse effects and patients who should not use our product candidates. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

| · |  | decreased demand for our products due to negative public perception;

| · |  | damage to our reputation;

| · |  | withdrawal of clinical trial participants or difficulties in recruiting new trial participants;

| · |  | initiation of investigations by regulators;

| · |  | costs to defend or settle the related litigation;

| · |  | a diversion of management’s time and our resources;

| · |  | substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients;

14

Table of Contents

| · |  | product recalls, withdrawals or labeling, marketing or promotional restrictions;

| · |  | loss of revenues from product sales; and

| · |  | the inability to commercialize any of our product candidates, if approved.

Although we maintain product liability insurance for our product candidates, it is possible that our liabilities could exceed our insurance coverage. We intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products if we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates. However, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or to obtain insurance coverage that will be adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. If a successful product liability claim or series of claims is brought against us for uninsured liabilities or in excess of insured liabilities, our assets may not be sufficient to cover such claims and our business operations could be impaired.

Should any of the events described above occur, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Due to our limited resources and access to capital, we must, and have in the past decided to, prioritize development of certain product candidates over other potential candidates. These decisions may prove to have been wrong and may adversely affect our revenues.

Because we have limited resources and access to capital to fund our operations, we must decide which product candidates to pursue and the amount of resources to allocate to each. Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular compounds, product candidates or therapeutic areas may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources away from better opportunities. Similarly, our decisions to delay, terminate or collaborate with third parties in respect of certain product development programs may also prove not to be optimal and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the market potential of our product candidates or misread trends in the biopharmaceutical industry, in particular for our lead product candidates, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Risks Related to Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

Enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our product candidates and may affect the prices we may set.

In the United States, the European Union and other foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that could affect our future results of operations. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the United States federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively the ACA, became law. The ACA is a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms.

Among the provisions of the ACA of importance to our potential product candidates are the following:

| · |  | an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic products, apportioned among these entities according to their market share in certain government healthcare programs, although this fee would not apply to sales of certain products approved exclusively for orphan indications;

15

Table of Contents

| · |  | expansion of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to certain individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level, thereby potentially increasing a manufacturer’s Medicaid rebate liability;

| · |  | expansion of manufacturers’ rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program by increasing the minimum rebate for both branded and generic drugs and revising the definition of “average manufacturer price,” or AMP, for calculating and reporting Medicaid drug rebates on outpatient prescription drug prices and extending rebate liability to prescriptions for individuals enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans;

| · |  | a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for products that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected;

| · |  | expanding the types of entities eligible for the 340B drug discount program;

| · |  | establishing the Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, which requires manufacturers to provide a 50% (increased to 70% pursuant to subsequent legislation) point‑of‑sale‑discount off the negotiated price of applicable products to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period as a condition for the manufacturers’ outpatient products to be covered under Medicare Part D;

| · |  | a new Patient‑Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; and

| · |  | establishment of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation within Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending, potentially including prescription product spending.

Since its enactment, some of the provisions of the ACA have yet to be fully implemented, while certain provisions have been subject to judicial, congressional, and executive challenges. As a result, there have been delays in the implementation of, and action taken to repeal or replace, certain aspects of the ACA. The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld certain key aspects of the legislation, including a tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year, which is commonly known as the requirement that all individuals maintain health insurance coverage or pay a penalty, referred to as the “individual mandate.” However, as a result of tax reform legislation passed in December 2017, the individual mandate has been eliminated effective January 1, 2019. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the repeal of the individual mandate will cause 13 million fewer Americans to be insured in 2027 and premiums in insurance markets may rise.

Since January 2017, President Trump has signed several executive orders and other directives designed to delay, circumvent, or loosen certain requirements mandated by the ACA. One such Executive Order terminates the cost-sharing subsidies that reimburse insurers under the ACA. The loss of the cost share reduction payments is expected to increase premiums on certain policies issued by qualified health plans under the ACA. Further, on June 14, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that the federal government was not required to pay more than $12 billion in ACA risk corridor payments to third-party payors who argued were owed to them. This was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which heard arguments on December 10, 2019. We cannot predict how the U.S. Supreme Court will rule. The effects of this gap in reimbursement on third-party payors, the viability of the ACA marketplace, providers, and potentially our business, are not yet known. In December 2018, CMS published a final rule permitting further collections and payments to and from certain ACA qualified health plans and health insurance issuers under the ACA risk adjustment program in response to the outcome of the federal district court litigation regarding the method CMS uses to determine this risk adjustment. In addition, CMS published a final rule that would give states greater flexibility, starting in 2020, in setting benchmarks for insurers in the individual and small group marketplaces, which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under the ACA for plans sold through such marketplaces. On December 10, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court

16

Table of Contents

heard arguments in Moda Health Plan, Inc. v. United States, which will determine whether the government must make risk corridor payments. The effects of this gap in reimbursement on third-party payors, the viability of the ACA marketplace, providers, and potentially our business, are not yet known.

Concurrently, Congress has considered legislation that would repeal or repeal and replace all or part of the ACA. On December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court judge in the Northern District of Texas ruled that the individual mandate portion of the ACA is an essential and inseverable feature of the ACA, and therefore because the mandate was repealed as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. The Trump administration and CMS have both stated that the ruling will have no immediate effect, and on December 30, 2018, the same judge issued an order staying the judgment pending appeal. On December 18, 2019, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, and remanded the case to the lower court to reconsider its earlier invalidation of the full ACA. It is unclear how these decisions and any subsequent appeals and other efforts to repeal and replace the ACA will impact the ACA and our business. Litigation and legislation over the ACA are likely to continue, with unpredictable and uncertain results. We will continue to evaluate the effect that the ACA and its possible repeal and replacement has on our business.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding. For example, on August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. A Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, tasked with recommending a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2012 through 2021, was unable to reach required goals, thereby triggering the legislation's automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year. These reductions went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, including without limitation the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, will remain in effect through 2029 unless additional Congressional action is taken. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other health care funding, which could have a material adverse effect on our customers and accordingly, our financial operations.

Moreover, payment methodologies may be subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives. the Trump administration’s budget proposal for fiscal year 2019 contains further drug price control measures that could be enacted during the 2019 budget process or in other future legislation, including, for example, measures to permit Medicare Part D plans to negotiate the price of certain drugs under Medicare Part B, to allow some states to negotiate drug prices under Medicaid, and to eliminate cost sharing for generic drugs for low-income patients. Additionally, the Trump administration released a "Blueprint" to lower drug prices and reduce out of pocket costs of drugs that contains additional proposals to increase manufacturer competition, increase the negotiating power of certain federal healthcare programs, incentivize manufacturers to lower the list price of their products and reduce the out of pocket costs of drug products paid by consumers. While any proposed measures will require authorization through additional legislation to become effective, Congress and the Trump administration have each indicated that it will continue to seek new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has already started the process of soliciting feedback on some of these measures and, at the same time, is immediately implementing others under its existing authority. For example, in May 2019, CMS issued a final rule to allow Medicare Advantage Plans the option of using step therapy for Part B drugs beginning January 1, 2020. This final rule codified CMS’s policy change that was effective January 1, 2019.

CMS may develop new payment and delivery models, such as bundled payment models. As noted above, CMS has recently published final rules that would give states greater flexibility in setting benchmarks for insurers

17

Table of Contents

in the individual and small group marketplaces, which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under the ACA for plans sold through such marketplaces. In May 2019, CMS issued a final rule to allow Medicare Advantage Plans the option of using step therapy, a type of prior authorization, for Part B drugs beginning January 1, 2020. This final rule codified CMS’s policy change that was effective January 1, 2019. It is unclear what effect these changes will have on our business.

In addition, recently there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures.

Further, legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post‑approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical products. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals, if any, of our product candidates, may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post‑marketing conditions and other requirements.

Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly aggressive in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third‑party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our products or put pressure on our product pricing, which could negatively affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

In the European Union, similar political, economic and regulatory developments may affect our ability to profitably commercialize our current or any future products. In addition to continuing pressure on prices and cost containment measures, legislative developments at the European Union or member state level may result in significant additional requirements or obstacles that may increase our operating costs. The delivery of healthcare in the European Union, including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than European Union, law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of health care and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most European Union member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever‑increasing European Union and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post‑approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize any products for which we obtain marketing approval. In international markets, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies.

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we or our collaborators are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we or our collaborators are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, our product candidates may lose any regulatory

18

Table of Contents

approval that may have been obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business.

We may be subject to healthcare and privacy laws, regulation and enforcement. Our failure to comply with these laws could harm our results of operations and financial conditions.

Although we do not currently have any products on the market, our current and future operations may be directly, or indirectly through our customers and third‑party payors, subject to various U.S. federal and state healthcare laws and regulations, including, without limitation, the U.S. federal Anti‑Kickback Statute. Healthcare providers, physicians and others play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any products for which we obtain marketing approval. These laws may impact, among other things, our proposed sales, marketing and education programs and constrain our business and financial arrangements and relationships with third‑party payors, healthcare professionals who participate in our clinical research program, healthcare professionals and others who recommend, purchase, or provide our approved products, and other parties through which we market, sell and distribute our products for which we obtain marketing approval. In addition, we may be subject to patient data privacy and security regulation by both the U.S. federal government and the other states and countries in which we conduct our business. See also the risk factor titled “We may fail to comply with evolving European and other privacy laws.” below. Finally, our current and future operations are subject to additional healthcare‑related statutory and regulatory requirements and enforcement by foreign regulatory authorities in jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. The shifting compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust and expandable systems to comply with multiple jurisdictions with different compliance or reporting requirements increases the possibility that a healthcare company may run afoul of one or more of the requirements. We have no experience in the sale or marketing of pharmaceutical products and, upon approval and commercialization, we will need to establish and maintain a robust internal system to ensure compliance with the different health care laws and regulations. The establishment of an internal compliance program will involve substantial costs and the program may not be successful in complying with the different reporting requirements.

The laws that may affect our ability to operate include:

| · |  | the U.S. federal Anti‑Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons or entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or paying any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe, or certain rebate), directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, lease, order or recommendation of, any good, facility, item or service, for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under U.S. federal and state healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;

| · |  | the U.S. federal false claims and civil monetary penalties laws, including, without limitation, the civil False Claims Act (which can be enforced through “qui tam,” or whistleblower actions, by private citizens on behalf of the federal government), which impose criminal and civil penalties against individuals or entities for, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the U.S. federal government, claims for payment or approval that are false or fraudulent or for knowingly making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the U.S. federal government. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act or federal civil money penalties statute;

| · |  | the anti-inducement law prohibits, among other things, the offering or giving of remuneration, which includes, without limitation, any transfer of items or services for free or for less than fair market value (with limited exceptions), to a Medicare or Medicaid beneficiary that the person know or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary’s selection of a particular supplier of items or services reimbursable by a federal or state governmental program;

19

Table of Contents

| · |  | the U.S. federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, which imposes criminal and civil liability for, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement, in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services;

| · |  | HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, and its implementing regulations, and as amended again by the Final HIPAA Omnibus Rule, published in January 2013, which imposes certain obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information without appropriate authorization by covered entities subject to the rule, such as health plans, healthcare clearinghouses and healthcare providers, as well as their business associates that perform certain services involving the use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information;

| · |  | the U.S. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, which prohibits, among other things, the adulteration or misbranding of drugs, biologics and medical devices;

| · |  | the U.S. federal legislation commonly referred to as Physician Payments Sunshine Act, and its implementing regulations, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program to report annually to the CMS information related to certain payments and other transfers of value to physicians (currently defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Effective January 1, 2022, these reporting obligations will extend to include transfers of value made to certain non-physician providers such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners;

| · |  | analogous state laws and regulations, including: state anti‑kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to our business practices, including but not limited to, research, distribution, sales and marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by any third‑party payor, including private insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government, or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; and state laws and regulations that require drug manufacturers to file reports relating to pricing and marketing information, which requires tracking gifts and other remuneration and items of value provided to healthcare professionals and entities, and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not pre-empted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts; and

European and other foreign law equivalents of each of the laws, including reporting requirements detailing interactions with and payments to healthcare providers. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion of drugs from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non‑compliance with these laws, reputational harm and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Defending against any such actions can be costly and time-consuming and may require significant financial and personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired. Further, if any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be

20

Table of Contents

subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs.

The scope and enforcement of each of these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change in the current environment of healthcare reform, especially in light of the lack of applicable precedent and regulations. For example, the definition of the “remuneration” under the federal Anti Kickback Statute has been interpreted to include anything of value. Further, courts have found that if “one purpose” of remuneration is to induce referrals, the federal Anti Kickback Statute is violated. Federal and state enforcement bodies have recently increased their scrutiny of interactions between healthcare companies and healthcare providers, which has led to a number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry. Ensuring business arrangements comply with applicable healthcare laws, as well as responding to possible investigations by government authorities, can be time and resource consuming and can divert a company’s attention from the business. Additionally, recent healthcare reform legislation has strengthened federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws. For example, the ACA amends the intent requirement of the federal Anti Kickback Statute and criminal healthcare fraud statutes to clarify that liability under these statutes does not require a person or entity to have actual knowledge of the statutes or a specific intent to violate them. Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws.

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. For example, the provision of benefits or advantages to physicians to induce or encourage the prescription, recommendation, endorsement, purchase, supply, order or use of medicinal products is generally not permitted in the countries that form part of the European Union. Some European Union Member States, like the United Kingdom, through the United Kingdom Bribery Act 2010, have enacted laws explicitly prohibiting the provision of these types of benefits and advantages. Violations of these laws can subject us to criminal, civil and administrative sanctions, including monetary penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, individual imprisonment and exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, reputational harm, and the required curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Any action against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business.

We may fail to comply with evolving European and other privacy laws.

In Europe, Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of October 24, 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, or the Directive, and Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of July 12, 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (as amended by Directive 2009/136/EC), or the e-Privacy-Directive, have required the European Union, or EU member states, to implement data protection laws to meet strict privacy requirements. The EU is in the process of replacing the e-Privacy Directive (2002/58/EC) with a new set of rules taking the form of a regulation, which will be directly implemented in the laws of each European member state, without the need for further enactment. While the e-Privacy Regulation was originally intended to be adopted on May 25, 2018 (alongside the GDPR), it is still going through the European legislative process. Draft regulations were rejected by the Permanent Representatives Committee of the Council of EU on November 22, 2019; it is not clear when new regulations will be adopted in 2020.

Beginning on May 25, 2018, the Directive was replaced by Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of April 27, 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, or the GDPR. The GDPR imposes a broad range of strict requirements on companies subject to the GDPR, such as us, including requirements relating to having legal bases for processing personal information relating to identifiable individuals and transferring such information outside the European Economic Area, or the EEA, including to the United States, providing details to those individuals

21

Table of Contents

regarding the processing of their personal information, keeping personal information secure, having data processing agreements with third parties who process personal information, responding to individuals’ requests to exercise their rights in respect of their personal information, reporting security breaches involving personal data to the competent national data protection authority and affected individuals, appointing data protection officers, conducting data protection impact assessments, and record-keeping. The GDPR substantially increases the penalties to which we could be subject in the event of any non-compliance, including fines of up to 10,000,000 Euros or up to 2% of our total worldwide annual turnover for certain comparatively minor offenses, or up to 20,000,000 Euros or up to 4% of our total worldwide annual turnover for more serious offenses. Given the new law, we face uncertainty as to the exact interpretation of the new requirements, and we may be unsuccessful in implementing all measures required by data protection authorities or courts in interpretation of the new law.

In particular, national laws of member states of the EU are in the process of being adapted to the requirements under the GDPR, thereby implementing national laws which may partially deviate from the GDPR and impose different obligations from country to country, so that we do not expect to operate in a uniform legal landscape in the EU. Also, in the field of handling genetic data, the GDPR specifically allows national laws to impose additional and more specific requirements or restrictions, and European laws have historically differed quite substantially in this field, leading to additional uncertainty.

We must also ensure that we maintain adequate safeguards to enable the transfer of personal data outside of the EEA, in particular to the United States in compliance with European data protection laws, including the GDPR. We expect that we will continue to face uncertainty as to whether our efforts to comply with our obligations under European privacy laws will be sufficient. If we are investigated by a European data protection authority, we may face fines and other penalties. Any such investigation or charges by European data protection authorities could have a negative effect on our existing business and on our ability to attract and retain new clients or pharmaceutical partners. We may also experience hesitancy, reluctance, or refusal by European or multi-national clients or pharmaceutical partners to continue to use our products and solutions due to the potential risk exposure as a result of the current (and, in particular, future) data protection obligations imposed on them by certain data protection authorities in interpretation of current law, including the GDPR. Such clients or pharmaceutical partners may also view any alternative approaches to compliance as being too costly, too burdensome, too legally uncertain, or otherwise objectionable and therefore decide not to do business with us. Any of the foregoing could materially harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

If we fail to obtain orphan drug designation or obtain or maintain orphan drug exclusivity for our products, our competitors may sell products to treat the same conditions and our revenue will be reduced.

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the European Union, after a recommendation from the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products, or COMP, the European Commission grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life‑threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union. Additionally, designation is granted for products intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life‑threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic condition when, without incentives, it is unlikely that sales of the drug in the European Union would be sufficient to justify the necessary investment in developing the drug or biological product or where there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment, or, if such a method exists, the medicine must be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition.

In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user‑fee waivers. In addition, if a product receives the first FDA approval for the indication for which it has orphan designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means the FDA may not approve any other application to market the same drug for the same indication for a period of seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority

22

Table of Contents

over the product with orphan exclusivity or where the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity. In the European Union, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and ten years of market exclusivity following drug or biological product approval. This period may be reduced to six years if the orphan drug designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity.

We may from time to time seek orphan drug designation in the United States or Europe for certain indications addressed by our product candidates. For example, in September 2017, the FDA granted orphan drug designation for the use of efgartigimod for the treatment of MG. Even if we are able to obtain orphan designation, we may not be the first to obtain marketing approval for such indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products. In addition, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be limited if we seek approval for an indication broader than the orphan‑designated indication or may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. Further, even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active moieties can be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA or the EMA can subsequently approve the same drug with the same active moiety for the same condition if the FDA or the EMA concludes that the later drug is safer, more effective, or makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval. The successful commercialization of our product candidates will depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities and health insurers establish adequate reimbursement levels and pricing policies. Failure to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates, if approved, could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue.

Even if our product candidates are approved for marketing, sales of such product candidates will depend, in part, on the extent to which third-party payors, including government health programs in the United States (such as Medicare and Medicaid) and other countries, commercial health insurers, and managed care organizations, provide coverage and establish adequate reimbursement levels for such product candidates. Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the European Union, the United States and abroad to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for newly approved products and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of our product candidates due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products.

In the United States and markets in other countries, third-party payors, including private and governmental payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs and biologics will be covered and patients who are prescribed treatments for their conditions and providers performing the prescribed services generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the associated healthcare costs. Patients are unlikely to use any product candidates we may develop unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of such product candidates. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs and biologics. Some third-party payors may require pre-approval of coverage for new or innovative devices or drug therapies before they will reimburse health care providers who use such therapies. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates. The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a product may be separate from the process for setting the price or reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the product once coverage is approved. Third-party payors are increasingly

23

Table of Contents

challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services and imposing controls to manage costs, especially on drugs when an equivalent generic drug or a less expensive therapy is available. It is possible that a third‑party payor may consider our product candidates and other therapies to be substitutable and only offer to reimburse patients for the less expensive product. Even if we show improved efficacy or improved convenience of administration with our product candidates, pricing of existing drugs may limit the amount we will be able to charge for our product candidates. These payors may deny or revoke the reimbursement status of a given drug product or establish prices for new or existing marketed products at levels that are too low to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates, and may not be able to obtain a satisfactory financial return on products that we may develop. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, also known as a formulary, which might not include all of the approved products for a particular indication.

In order to secure coverage and reimbursement for any product candidate that might be approved for sale, we may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of the product candidate, and the cost of these studies would be in addition to the costs required to obtain FDA or other comparable marketing approvals. Even after pharmacogenomic studies are conducted, product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. A decision by a third-party payor not to cover any product candidates we may develop could reduce physician utilization of such product candidates once approved and have a material adverse effect on our sales, results of operations and financial condition. Additionally, a payor's decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. For example, the payor may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Further, one payor's determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage and reimbursement for the product, and the level of coverage and reimbursement can differ significantly from payor to payor. Third-party reimbursement and coverage may not be adequate to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. The insurance coverage and reimbursement status of newly-approved products for orphan diseases is particularly uncertain, and failure to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for any such product candidates could limit our ability to generate revenue.

The containment of healthcare costs also has become a priority for U.S. federal and state and international governments and the prices of pharmaceuticals have been a focus in this effort. Governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. For example, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively the ACA, contains provisions that may reduce the profitability of drug products through increased rebates for drugs reimbursed by Medicaid programs, extension of Medicaid rebates to Medicaid managed care plans, and mandatory discounts for certain Medicare Part D beneficiaries and annual fees based on pharmaceutical companies’ share of sales to federal health care programs. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and the adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit our potential revenue from the sale of any product candidates for which we may obtain approval. Coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more of our product candidates for which we or our collaborators receive marketing approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future. Obtaining and maintaining reimbursement status is time‑consuming and costly. No uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement for drug products exists among third‑party payors in the United States. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for drug products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time‑consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance. Furthermore, rules and regulations regarding reimbursement change frequently, in some cases at short notice, and we believe that changes in these rules and regulations are likely.

Further, there have been several recent U.S. congressional inquiries and proposed federal and proposed and enacted state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the

24

Table of Contents

relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the costs of drugs under Medicare and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. At the federal level, Congress and the Trump administration have each indicated that it will continue to pursue new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. Individual state legislatures have become increasingly aggressive in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing. Some of these measures include price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access, marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, measures designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional health care authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other health care programs. These measures could reduce the ultimate demand for our products, once approved, or put pressure on our product pricing.

Outside the United States, we will face challenges in obtaining adequate coverage and payment for any product candidates we may develop. Pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control in many countries. Pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can extend well beyond the receipt of regulatory marketing approval for a product candidate and may require us to conduct a clinical trial that compares the effectiveness of any product candidates we may develop to other available therapies to support cost-effectiveness. The conduct of such a clinical trial could be expensive, involve additional risk and result in delays in our commercialization efforts.

In the European Union, pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from country to country. Some countries provide that products may be marketed only after a reimbursement price has been agreed upon. Some countries may require the completion of additional studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies (so called health technology assessments, or HTAs) in order to obtain reimbursement or pricing approval. For example, the European Union provides options for its member states to restrict the range of products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. European Union member states may approve a specific price for a product or may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the product on the market. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for products, but monitor and control prescription volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions. Recently, many countries in the European Union have increased the amount of discounts required on pharmaceuticals, and these efforts could continue as countries attempt to manage healthcare expenditures, especially in light of the severe fiscal and debt crises experienced by many countries in the European Union. Political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Reference pricing used by various European Union member states and parallel trade (arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced member states) can further reduce prices. Special pricing and reimbursement rules may apply to orphan drugs. Inclusion of orphan drugs in reimbursement systems tend to focus on the medical usefulness, need, quality and economic benefits to patients and the healthcare system in relation to those drugs. Acceptance of any medicinal product for reimbursement may come with cost, use and often volume restrictions, which again can vary by country. In addition, results-based rules of reimbursement may apply. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our product candidates, if approved in those countries.

Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost‑containment initiatives in Europe, Canada and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of our product candidates. In many countries, the prices of medical products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medical products, but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

25

Table of Contents

The delivery of healthcare in the European Union, including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than European Union, law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of healthcare and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most European Union member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever‑increasing European Union and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post‑approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize any products for which we obtain marketing approval.

The future commercial success of our product candidates will depend on the degree of market acceptance of our potential products among physicians, patients, healthcare payers and the medical community.

Our product candidates are at varying stages of development and we may never have a product that is commercially successful. To date, we have no products authorized for marketing. Our lead product candidates will require further clinical investigation, regulatory review, significant marketing efforts and substantial investment before they can provide us with any revenues. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many other companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain regulatory approval for the marketing of their product. Due to the inherent risk in the development of pharmaceutical products, it is probable that not all or none of the product candidates in our portfolio will successfully complete development and be commercialized. We do not expect to be able to commercialize any of our products for a number of years. When available on the market, our products may not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, patients and the medical community, and we may not become profitable. In addition, efforts to educate the medical community and third‑party payers on the benefits of our products may require significant resources and may never be successful which would prevent us from generating significant revenues or becoming profitable. Market acceptance of our future products by physicians, patients and healthcare payers will depend on a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control, including, but not limited to:

| · |  | the wording of the product label;

| · |  | changes in the standard of care for the targeted indications for any product candidate;

| · |  | sales, marketing and distribution support;

| · |  | potential product liability claims;

| · |  | acceptance by physicians, patients and healthcare payers of each product as safe, effective and cost‑effective;

| · |  | relative convenience, ease of use, ease of administration and other perceived advantages over alternative products;

| · |  | prevalence and severity of adverse events or publicity;

| · |  | limitations, precautions or warnings listed in the summary of product characteristics, patient information leaflet, package labeling or instructions for use;

| · |  | the cost of treatment with our products in relation to alternative treatments;

| · |  | the extent to which products are approved for inclusion and reimbursed on formularies of hospitals and managed care organizations; and

26

Table of Contents

| · |  | whether our products are designated in the label, under physician treatment guidelines or under reimbursement guidelines as a first‑line, second‑line, or third‑line or last‑line therapy.

If our product candidates fail to gain market acceptance, this will have a material adverse impact on our ability to generate revenues. Even if some products achieve market acceptance, the market may prove not to be large enough to allow us to generate significant revenues.

We have never commercialized a product candidate before and may lack the necessary expertise, personnel and resources to successfully commercialize our products on our own or together with suitable collaboration partners.

We do not have a sales or marketing infrastructure and have no experience in the sale or marketing of pharmaceutical products. To achieve commercial success for any approved product, we must develop or acquire a sales and marketing organization, outsource these functions to third parties or enter into collaboration arrangements with third parties.

We may decide to establish our own sales and marketing capabilities and promote our product candidates if and when regulatory approval has been obtained in the major European Union countries and the United States. There are risks involved should we decide to establish our own sales and marketing capabilities or enter into arrangements with third parties to perform these services . Even if we establish sales and marketing capabilities, we may fail to launch our products effectively or to market our products effectively. In addition, recruiting and training a sales force is expensive and time consuming and could delay any product launch. In the event that any such launch is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our sales and marketing personnel. Factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize our products on our own include:

| · |  | our inability to recruit, train and retain adequate numbers of effective sales and marketing personnel;

| · |  | the inability of sales personnel to obtain access to or persuade adequate numbers of physicians to prescribe any future products;

| · |  | the lack of complementary products to be offered by sales personnel, which may put us at a competitive disadvantage relative to companies with more extensive product lines;

| · |  | unforeseen costs and expenses associated with creating an independent sales and marketing organization; and

| · |  | costs of marketing and promotion above those anticipated by us.

If we enter into arrangements with third parties to perform sales and marketing services, our product revenues or the profitability of these product revenues to us could be lower than if we were to market and sell any products that we develop ourselves. Such collaborative arrangements may place the commercialization of our products outside of our control and would make us subject to a number of risks including that we may not be able to control the amount or timing of resources that our collaborative partner devotes to our products or that our collaborator’s willingness or ability to complete its obligations, and our obligations under our arrangements may be adversely affected by business combinations or significant changes in our collaborator’s business strategy. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to sell and market our products or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. Acceptable third parties may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively.

If we do not establish sales and marketing capabilities successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we may not be successful in commercializing our products, which in turn would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

27

Table of Contents

Our product candidates for which we intend to seek approval as biological products may face competition sooner than anticipated.

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA‑licensed reference biological product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12‑year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well‑controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of their product. The law is complex and is still being interpreted and implemented by the FDA. As a result, its ultimate impact, implementation and meaning are subject to uncertainty.

We believe that any of our product candidates approved as a biological product under a BLA should qualify for the 12‑year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar product, once approved, will be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non‑biological products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

Nearly all aspects of our activities are subject to substantial regulation. No assurance can be given that any of our product candidates will fulfill regulatory compliance. Failure to comply with such regulations could result in delays, suspension, refusals and withdrawal of approvals, as well as fines.

The international biopharmaceutical and medical technology industry is highly regulated by the FDA, the EMA and other comparable foreign authorities and by other national or supra‑national regulatory authorities that impose substantial requirements covering nearly all aspects of our activities notably on research and development, manufacturing, preclinical tests, clinical trials, labeling, marketing, sales, storage, record keeping, promotion and pricing of our product candidates. Such regulation is further subject to regular review by the FDA, the EMA and other comparable foreign authorities which may result in changes in applicable regulation. If we do not comply with one or more of these requirements in a timely manner, or at all, our product development could experience significant delays as a result of the FDA, the EMA or other comparable regulatory authorities recommending non‑approval or restrictions on approval of a product candidate, leading to an inability to successfully commercialize any of our product candidates, which would materially harm our business. Any failure of any of our product candidates in clinical studies or to receive regulatory approval could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. If any of our product candidates fails to obtain approval on the basis of any applicable condensed regulatory approval process, this will prevent such product candidate from obtaining approval in a shortened time frame, or at all, resulting in increased expenses which would materially harm our business.

Compliance with requirements laid down by local regulatory authorities is necessary in each country where we, or any of our partners or licensees, conduct said activities in whole or in part. Local regulatory authorities notably include the EMA and the FDA. In order to market our future products in regions such as the European Economic Area, United States of America, Asia Pacific and many other foreign jurisdictions, we must obtain separate regulatory approvals. The approval procedures vary among countries and can require additional clinical testing, and the time required to obtain approval may differ from that required to obtain for example FDA or EMA approval. Moreover, clinical studies conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries. Approval by the FDA or EMA does not ensure approval by the comparable foreign

28

Table of Contents

authorities in other countries, and approval by one or more foreign regulatory authorities does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA or EMA.

There can be no assurance that our product candidates will fulfil the criteria required to obtain necessary regulatory approval to access the market. Also, at this time, we cannot guarantee or know the exact nature, precise timing and detailed costs of the efforts that will be necessary to complete the remainder of the development of our research programs and products candidates. Each of the FDA, the EMA and other comparable foreign authorities may impose its own requirements, may discontinue an approval or revoke a license, may refuse to grant approval, or may require additional data before granting approval, notwithstanding that approval may have been granted by the FDA, the EMA or one or more other comparable foreign authority. The FDA, the EMA or other comparable foreign authorities may also approve a product candidate for fewer or more limited indications or patient sub‑segments than requested or may grant approval subject to the performance of post‑marketing studies. The EMA’s, the FDA’s or other regulatory authority’s approval may be delayed, limited or denied for a number of reasons, most of which are beyond our control. Such reasons could include, among others, the production process or site not meeting the applicable requirements for the manufacture of regulated products, or the products not meeting applicable requirements for safety, purity or potency, or efficacy, during the clinical development stage or after marketing. No assurance can be given that clinical trials will be approved the FDA, the EMA or other comparable foreign authorities or that products will be approved for marketing by such regulatory authorities in any pre‑determined indication or intended use. Any of the FDA, the EMA and other comparable foreign authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data submitted for their review.

We and our collaborative partners are, or may become subject to, numerous ongoing other regulatory obligations, such as data protection, environmental, health and safety laws and restrictions on the experimental use of animals. The costs of compliance with such applicable regulations, requirements or guidelines could be substantial, and failure to comply could result in sanctions, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, denial of applications for marketing authorization of our products, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly increase our or our collaborative partners’ costs or delay the development and commercialization of our product candidates.

Because we are subject to environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we may become exposed to liability and substantial expenses in connection with environmental compliance or remediation activities which may adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Our operations, including our research, development, testing and manufacturing activities, are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These laws and regulations govern, among other things, the controlled use, handling, release and disposal of and the maintenance of a registry for, hazardous materials and biological materials, such as chemical solvents, human cells, carcinogenic compounds, mutagenic compounds and compounds that have a toxic effect on reproduction, laboratory procedures and exposure to blood‑borne pathogens. If we fail to comply with such laws and regulations, we could be subject to fines or other sanctions.

As with other companies engaged in activities similar to ours, we face a risk of environmental liability inherent in our current and historical activities, including liability relating to releases of or exposure to hazardous or biological materials. Environmental, health and safety laws and regulations are becoming more stringent. We may be required to incur substantial expenses in connection with future environmental compliance or remediation activities, in which case, our production and development efforts may be interrupted or delayed and our financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

29

Table of Contents

Our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, CROs, consultants, vendors and collaboration partners may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, CROs, consultants, vendors and collaboration partners may engage in fraudulent conduct or other illegal activities. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and negligent conduct or unauthorized activities that violate: (i) the regulations of the FDA, the EMA and other comparable foreign authorities, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to such authorities; (ii) manufacturing standards; (iii) federal and state data privacy, security, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations in the United States and in other countries; or (iv) laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate financial information and data. Specifically, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self‑dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Activities subject to these laws could also involve the improper use or misrepresentation of information obtained in the course of clinical trials or creating fraudulent data in our preclinical studies or clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with such laws or regulations. Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, results of operations and financial condition, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, disgorgements, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other U.S. or international healthcare programs, individual imprisonment, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non‑compliance with these laws, other sanctions, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Our high dependency on public perception of our products may negatively influence the success of these products.

If any of our product candidates are approved for commercial sale, we will be highly dependent upon consumer perceptions of the safety and quality of our products. We could be adversely affected if we were subject to negative publicity or if any of our products or any similar products distributed by other companies prove to be, or are asserted to be, harmful to patients. Because of our dependence upon consumer perception, any adverse publicity associated with illness or other adverse effects resulting from patients’ use or misuse of our products or any similar products distributed by other companies could have a material adverse impact on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Future adverse events in research into the cancer, inflammation and severe autoimmune diseases that we focus our research efforts on, or the biopharmaceutical industry more generally, could also result in greater governmental regulation, stricter labeling requirements and potential regulatory delays in the testing or approvals of our products. Any increased scrutiny could delay or increase the costs of obtaining regulatory approval for our product candidates.

Failure to successfully identify, develop and commercialize additional products or product candidates could impair our ability to grow.

Although a substantial amount of our efforts will focus on the continued preclinical and clinical testing and potential approval of our product candidates in our current pipeline, a key element of our long‑term growth

30

Table of Contents

strategy is to develop and market additional products and product candidates. Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, research programs to identify product candidates will require substantial additional technical, financial and human resources, whether or not any product candidates are ultimately identified. The success of this strategy depends partly upon our ability to identify, select and develop promising product candidates and products. Our technology platforms may fail to discover and to generate additional product candidates that are suitable for further development. All product candidates are prone to risks of failure typical of pharmaceutical product development, including the possibility that a product candidate may not be suitable for clinical development as a result of its harmful side effects, limited efficacy or other characteristics that indicate that it is unlikely to be a product that will receive approval by the FDA, the EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities and achieve market acceptance. If we do not successfully develop and commercialize product candidates based upon our technological approach, we may not be able to obtain product or collaboration revenues in future periods, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Our long‑term growth strategy to develop and market additional products and product candidates is heavily dependent on precise, accurate and reliable scientific data to identify, select and develop promising pharmaceutical product candidates and products. Our business decisions may therefore be adversely influenced by improper or fraudulent scientific data sourced from third parties. Any irregularities in the scientific data used by us to determine our focus in research and development of product candidates and products could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

Service or supply failures, or other failures, business interruptions or other disasters affecting the manufacturing facilities of any party participating in the supply chain would adversely affect our ability to supply our products.

Our product candidates are biologics and require processing steps that are more difficult than those required for most chemical pharmaceuticals. Accordingly, multiple steps are needed to control the manufacturing processes. Problems with these manufacturing processes, even minor deviations from the normal process or from the materials used in the manufacturing process, which may not be detectable by us in a timely manner, could lead to product defects or manufacturing failures, resulting in lot failures, product recalls, product liability claims and insufficient inventory.

Also, certain raw materials or other products necessary for the manufacture and formulation of our product candidates, some of which are difficult to source, are provided by single‑source unaffiliated third‑party suppliers. In addition, we rely on certain third parties to perform filling, finishing, distribution, laboratory testing and other services related to the manufacture of our product candidates, and to supply various raw materials and other products. We would be unable to obtain these raw materials, other products, or services for an indeterminate period of time if any of these third parties were to cease or interrupt production or otherwise fail to supply these materials, products, or services to us for any reason, including due to regulatory requirements or actions (including recalls), adverse financial developments at or affecting the supplier, failure by the supplier to comply with cGMPs, contamination, business interruptions, or labor shortages or disputes. In any such circumstances, we may not be able to engage a backup or alternative supplier or service provider in a timely manner or at all. This, in turn, could materially and adversely affect our ability to supply product candidates, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Certain of the raw materials required in the manufacture and the formulation of our product candidates may be derived from biological sources, including mammalian tissues, bovine serum and human serum albumin. There are certain European regulatory restrictions on using these biological source materials. If we are required to substitute for these sources to comply with European regulatory requirements, our clinical development or commercial activities may be delayed or interrupted.

31

Table of Contents

Our business may be adversely affected as a result of computer system failures. We may suffer data leaks or become the target of cyber-attacks, as a result of which our financial assets, confidential information and/or intellectual property may be materially negatively impacted. We may not be able to successfully protect our computer systems against unauthorized access by third parties.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of our third party service providers are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failure. Cyber-attacks are increasing in their frequency, sophistication and intensity, and have become increasingly difficult to detect. Cyber-attacks could include the deployment of harmful malware, ransomware, denial-of-service attacks, social engineering and other means to affect service reliability and threaten the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information. Cyber-attacks also could include phishing attempts or e-mail fraud to cause payments or information to be transmitted to an unintended recipient.

Any system failure, accident or security breach that causes interruptions in our own or in third party service vendors’ operations could result in a material disruption of our product development programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or future clinical trials could result in delays in our or our partners’ regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs in order to recover or reproduce the lost data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach results in a loss or damage to our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we may incur liability, our product development programs and competitive position may be adversely affected and the further development of our product candidates may be delayed. If the integrity of our cybersecurity systems is breached, we may incur significant effects such as remediation expenses, lost revenues, litigation costs, and increased insurance premiums and may also experience reputational damage and the erosion of shareholder value. Furthermore, we may incur additional costs to remedy the damage caused by these disruptions or security breaches. Like other companies, we have on occasion experienced, and will continue to experience, threats to our data and systems, including malicious codes and viruses, phishing, business email compromise attacks, or other cyber-attacks. Whereas none of these instances had a material impact so far, the number and complexity of these threats continue to increase over time. If a material breach of our information technology systems or those of our third party service providers occurs, the market perception of the effectiveness of our security measures could be harmed and our reputation and credibility could be damaged.

We could be required to expend significant amounts of money and other resources to respond to these threats or breaches and to repair or replace information systems or networks, and could suffer financial loss or the loss of valuable confidential information. In addition, we could be subject to regulatory actions and/or claims made by individuals and groups in private litigation involving privacy issues related to data collection and use practices and other data privacy laws and regulations, including claims for misuse or inappropriate disclosure of data, as well as unfair or deceptive practices. Although we develop and maintain systems and controls designed to prevent these events from occurring, and we have a process to identify and mitigate threats, the development and maintenance of these systems, controls and processes is costly and requires ongoing monitoring and updating as technologies change and efforts to overcome security measures become increasingly sophisticated. Moreover, despite our efforts, the possibility of these events occurring cannot be eliminated entirely and there can be no assurance that any measures we take will prevent cyber-attacks or security breaches that could adversely affect our business.

In order to successfully commercialize and market our products in the future, we may need to implement additional enterprise resource management systems, which is a complex process that may cause us to face delays. We may also need to implement computer systems, such as additional global enterprise research systems, or ERP systems, in which we have limited experience and which may prove a complex process that could cause delays in our commercialization process.

32

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Our Dependence on Third Parties

We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties, including independent clinical investigators and CROs, to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.

We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon third parties, including independent clinical investigators and third‑party CROs, to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials and to monitor and manage data for our ongoing preclinical and clinical programs. We rely on these parties for execution of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies and trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards, and our reliance on these third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our third party contractors and CROs are required to comply with GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, the EMA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our products in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we, our investigators or any of our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. Upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority may determine that our clinical trials do not fully comply with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

Further, these investigators and CROs are not our employees and we will not be able to control, other than by contract, the amount of resources, including time, which they devote to our product candidates and clinical trials. If independent investigators or CROs fail to devote sufficient resources to the development of our product candidates, or if their performance is substandard, it may delay or compromise the prospects for approval and commercialization of any product candidates that we develop. In addition, the use of third‑party service providers requires us to disclose our proprietary information to these parties, which could increase the risk that this information will be misappropriated.

Our CROs have the right to terminate their agreements with us in the event of an uncured material breach. In addition, some of our CROs have an ability to terminate their respective agreements with us if it can be reasonably demonstrated that the safety of the subjects participating in our clinical trials warrants such termination, if we make a general assignment for the benefit of our creditors or if we are liquidated.

There is a limited number of third‑party service providers that specialize or have the expertise required to achieve our business objectives. If any of our relationships with these third‑party CROs or clinical investigators terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or investigators or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. If CROs or clinical investigators do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.

Switching or adding additional CROs (or investigators) involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter similar

33

Table of Contents

challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects.

We rely and will continue to rely on collaborative partners regarding the development of our research programs and product candidates. If we fail to enter into new strategic relationships our business, financial condition, commercialization prospects and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

We are, and expect to continue to be, dependent on partnerships with partners relating to the development and commercialization of our existing and future research programs and product candidates. We currently have collaborative research relationships with various pharmaceutical companies, such as Janssen, AbbVie, Shire and with various academic and research institutions worldwide, for the development of product candidates resulting from such collaborations. We had, have and will continue to have discussions on potential partnering opportunities with various pharmaceutical companies. If we fail to enter into or maintain collaborations on reasonable terms or at all, our ability to develop our existing or future research programs and product candidates could be delayed, the commercial potential of our products could change and our costs of development and commercialization could increase.

Our dependence on collaborative partners subjects us to a number of risks, including, but not limited to, the following:

| · |  | we may not be able to control the amount and timing of resources that the collaboration partner devotes to our research programs and product candidates;

| · |  | for collaboration agreements where we are solely or partially responsible for funding development expenses through a defined milestone event, the payments we receive from the collaboration partner may not be sufficient to cover the expenses we have or would need to incur in order to achieve that milestone event;

| · |  | for collaboration agreements where we are solely or partially responsible for funding development expenses over a significant time period in the future, we may not be able to accurately predict or control the amount of resources spent within the budgets for which we may be partially responsible, as a result of which we may end up spending more on such development activities than we had previously assessed or as a result of which the funds spent by us may not be used in the most efficient manner;

| · |  | we may be required to relinquish significant rights, including intellectual property, marketing and distribution rights;

| · |  | our anticipated payments under any partnership agreement (e.g., royalty payments for licensed products) may not materialize;

| · |  | our current and future collaborators may fail to exercise their options to license certain of our product candidates, which may occur for reasons unrelated to the therapeutic or commercial potential of our product candidates but may nevertheless adversely impact our ability to develop and commercialize such product candidates;

| · |  | our current and future collaborators may terminate their collaborations with us, and in such case we may not be willing or able to find other collaborators and/or to develop and commercialize the relevant product candidate(s) independently;

| · |  | we rely on the information and data received from third parties regarding their research programs and product candidates and will not have control of the process conducted by the third party in gathering

34

Table of Contents

and composing such data and information. We may not have formal or appropriate guarantees from such third parties with respect to the quality and the completeness of such data;

| · |  | if our collaborators fail to exercise their options to license our product candidates, or if rights to develop and commercialize our product candidates subject to collaborations revert to us for any reason, we may not have sufficient financial resources to develop such product candidates, which may result in us failing to recognize any value from our investments in developing such product candidates;

| · |  | a collaborative partner may develop a competing product either by itself or in collaboration with others, including one or more of our competitors;

| · |  | our collaborative partners’ willingness or ability to complete their obligations under our partnership arrangements may be adversely affected by business combinations or significant changes in a collaborative partner’s business strategy;

| · |  | we may experience delays in, or increases in the costs of, the development of our research programs and product candidates due to the termination or expiration of collaborative research and development arrangements;

| · |  | we may have disagreements with collaborative partners, including disagreements over proprietary rights, contract interpretation or the preferred course of development, that might cause delays or termination of the research, development or commercialization of product candidates, might lead to additional responsibilities for us with respect to product candidates, or might result in litigation or arbitration, any of which would be time‑consuming and expensive;

| · |  | collaborative partners may not properly maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or may use proprietary information in such a way as to invite litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property or proprietary information or expose us to potential litigation; or

| · |  | collaborative partners may infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, which may expose us to litigation and potential liability.

We face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborative partners. Our ability to reach a definitive agreement for a partnership will depend, among other things, upon an assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed partnership and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. These factors may include the design or results of clinical trials, the likelihood of regulatory approval, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products, the existence of uncertainty with respect to our ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership regardless of the merits of the challenge and industry and market conditions generally. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a partnership could be more attractive than the one with us.

We rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties to supply and manufacture our product candidates, and we expect to continue to rely on third parties to manufacture our products, if approved. The development of such product candidates and the commercialization of any products, if approved, could be stopped, delayed or made less profitable if any such third party fails to provide us with sufficient quantities of product candidates or products or fails to do so at acceptable quality levels or prices or fails to maintain or achieve satisfactory regulatory compliance

We do not currently have, nor do we plan to acquire, the infrastructure or capability internally to manufacture our product candidates for use in the conduct of our clinical studies or for commercial supply, if our

35

Table of Contents

products are approved. Instead, we rely on, and expect to continue to rely on contract manufacturing organizations, or CMOs. We currently rely mainly on Lonza Sales AG, or Lonza, based in Slough, UK and Singapore for the manufacturing of the drug substance of all our products and the production cell line POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV jointly owned by Lonza and BioWa, Inc. for clinical and commercial scale production of ADCC enhanced antibody products. Reliance on third‑party providers may expose us to more risk than if we were to manufacture our product candidates ourselves. We do not control the manufacturing processes of the CMOs we contract with and are dependent on those third parties for the production of our product candidates in accordance with relevant regulations (such as cGMP), which includes, among other things, quality control, quality assurance and the maintenance of records and documentation.

If we were to experience an unexpected loss of supply of or if any supplier were unable to meet our demand for any of our product candidates, we could experience delays in our research or planned clinical studies or commercialization. We could be unable to find alternative suppliers of acceptable quality, in the appropriate volumes and at an acceptable cost. Moreover, our suppliers are often subject to strict manufacturing requirements and rigorous testing requirements, which could limit or delay production. The long transition periods necessary to switch manufacturers and suppliers, if necessary, would significantly delay our clinical studies and the commercialization of our products, if approved, which would materially adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operation.

In complying with the manufacturing regulations of the FDA, the EMA and other comparable foreign authorities, we and our third party suppliers must spend significant time, money and effort in the areas of design and development, testing, production, record keeping and quality control to assure that the products meet applicable specifications and other regulatory requirements. The failure to comply with these requirements could result in an enforcement action against us, including the seizure of products and shutting down of production. We and our third party suppliers may also be subject to audits by the FDA, the EMA or other comparable foreign authorities. If any of our third party suppliers fails to comply with cGMP or other applicable manufacturing regulations, our ability to develop and commercialize the products could suffer significant interruptions. We face risks inherent in relying on a single CMO, as any disruption, such as a fire, natural hazards or vandalism at the CMO could significantly interrupt our manufacturing capability. Alternative production plans in place or disaster recovery facilities available to us may not be sufficient. In case of a disruption, we may have to establish additional alternative manufacturing sources. This would require substantial capital on our part, which we may not be able to obtain on commercially acceptable terms or at all. Additionally, we may experience significant manufacturing delays as we build or locate replacement facilities and seek and obtain necessary regulatory approvals. If this occurs, we will be unable to satisfy manufacturing needs on a timely basis, if at all. Also, operating any new facilities may be more expensive than operating our current facilities. Further, business interruption insurance may not adequately compensate us for any losses that may occur, and we would have to bear the additional cost of any disruption. For these reasons, a significant disruptive event of the manufacturing facility could have drastic consequences, including placing our financial stability at risk.

The manufacturing of all of our product candidates requires using cells which are stored in a cell bank. We have one master cell bank for each product manufactured in accordance with cGMP. Working cell banks have not yet been manufactured. Half of each master cell bank is stored at a separate site so that in case of a catastrophic event at one site we believe sufficient vials of the master cell banks are left at the alternative storage site to continue manufacturing. We believe sufficient working cell banks could be produced from the vials of the master cell bank stored at a given site to assure product supply for the future. However, it is possible that we could lose multiple cell banks and have our manufacturing significantly impacted by the need to replace these cell banks, which could materially adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

36

Table of Contents

For our financial reporting, we are partially dependent on financial information received from our third party partners, which we do not control and which may not be received in a timely manner and which may not be accurate. Our reliance on financial information received from our collaboration partners may impact our own internal and external financial reporting and any delay in the provision of such financial information to us or any failure by us to identify mistakes in the financial information provided to us may cause our own financial statements to be partially inaccurate.

We have collaborated, and plan to continue to collaborate, with third parties on product candidates that we believe have promising utility in disease areas or patient populations that are better served by resources of larger biopharmaceutical companies. See “Collaborations” in “Item 4B.—Business Overview” for a more detailed description of these collaborations. As part of some of these collaborations, our collaboration partners are responsible for providing us with financial information regarding specific projects, including funds spent, liabilities incurred and expected future costs, on which we rely for our own financial reporting. In the event that our collaboration partners fail to provide us with the necessary financial information within the agreed upon timeframes, or if such financial information proves partially inaccurate, this is likely to impact the accuracy of our own financial reporting. Any inaccuracy in our financial reporting could cause investors to lose confidence in our financial reporting, which may negatively impact the price of our ADSs.

Risks Related to Intellectual Property

We rely on patents and other intellectual property rights to protect our product candidates and the SIMPLE Antibody TM, NHance® and ABDEG TM platform technologies, the enforcement, defense and maintenance of which may be challenging and costly. Failure to enforce or protect these rights adequately could harm our ability to compete and impair our business.

Our commercial success depends in part on obtaining and maintaining patents and other forms of intellectual property rights for our product candidates, methods used to manufacture those products and the methods for treating patients using those products, or on licensing in such rights. Failure to protect or to obtain, maintain or extend adequate patent and other intellectual property rights could materially adversely affect our ability to develop and market our products and product candidates. The enforcement, defense and maintenance of such patents and other intellectual property rights may be challenging and costly.

We cannot be certain that patents will be issued or granted with respect to applications that are currently pending. As a biopharmaceutical company, our patent position is uncertain because it involves complex legal and factual considerations. The standards applied by the European Patent Office, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, and foreign patent offices in granting patents are not always applied uniformly or predictably. For example, there is no uniform worldwide policy regarding patentable subject matter or the scope of claims allowable in biopharmaceutical patents. Consequently, patents may not issue from our pending patent applications. As such, we do not know the degree of future protection that we will have on our proprietary products and technology. The scope of patent protection that the European Patent Office and the USPTO will grant with respect to the antibodies in our antibodies product pipeline is uncertain. It is possible that the European Patent Office and the USPTO will not allow broad antibody claims that cover antibodies closely related to our product candidates as well as the specific antibody. As a result, upon receipt of EMA or FDA approval, competitors may be free to market antibodies almost identical to ours, including biosimilar antibodies, thereby decreasing our market share. However, a competitor cannot submit to the FDA an application for a biosimilar product based on one of our products until four years following the date of approval of our “reference product,” and the FDA may not approve such a biosimilar product until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was approved. See the section of this annual report titled “Item 4.—Business—Government Regulation—Licensure and Regulation of Biologics in the United States—Biosimilars and Exclusivity” for more details regarding biosimilar regulatory exclusivities.

37

Table of Contents

The patent prosecution process is expensive and time‑consuming, and we and our current or future licensors, licensees or collaboration partners may not be able to prepare, file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we or our licensors, licensees or collaboration partners will fail to identify patentable aspects of inventions made in the course of development and commercialization activities before it is too late to obtain patent protection on them. Further, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our and our current or future licensors’, licensees’ or collaboration partners’ patent rights are highly uncertain. Our and our licensors’ pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued that protect our technology or products, in whole or in part, or that effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and products. Moreover, in some circumstances, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, or we may need to enter into new license or royalty agreements, covering technology that we license from or license to third parties or have developed in collaboration with our collaboration partners and are reliant on patent procurement activities of our licensors, licensees or collaboration partners. Therefore, these patents and applications may not be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. If our current or future licensors, licensees or collaboration partners fail to establish, maintain or protect such patents and other intellectual property rights, such rights may be reduced or eliminated. If our licensors, licensees or collaboration partners are not fully cooperative or disagree with us as to the prosecution, maintenance or enforcement of any patent rights, such patent rights could be compromised. The patent examination process may require us or our licensors, licensees or collaboration partners to narrow the scope of the claims of our or our licensors’, licensees’ or collaboration partners’ pending and future patent applications, which may limit the scope of patent protection that may be obtained. We cannot assure you that all of the potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found. If such prior art exists, it can invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. Even if patents do successfully issue and even if such patents cover our product candidates, third parties may initiate an opposition, interference, re‑examination, post‑grant review, inter partes review, nullification or derivation action in court or before patent offices, or similar proceedings challenging the validity, enforceability or scope of such patents, which may result in the patent claims being narrowed or invalidated. Our and our licensors’, licensees’ or collaboration partners’ patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications, and then only to the extent the issued claims cover the technology.

Because patent applications are confidential for a period of time after filing, and some remain so until issued, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to file any patent application related to a product candidate. Furthermore, as to the United States, if third parties have filed such patent applications on or before March 15, 2013, an interference proceeding can be initiated by such third parties to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of our applications. If third parties have filed such applications after March 15, 2013, a derivation proceeding can be initiated by such third parties to determine whether our invention was derived from theirs. Even where we have a valid and enforceable patent, we may not be able to exclude others from practicing our invention where the other party can show that they used the invention in commerce before our filing date, or if the other party is able to obtain a compulsory license.

Issued patents covering one or more of our products or the SIMPLE Antibody TM, NHance® and ABDEG TM platform technologies could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court.

To protect our competitive position, we may from time to time need to resort to litigation in order to enforce or defend any patents or other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to us, or to determine or challenge the scope or validity of patents or other intellectual property rights of third parties. Enforcement of intellectual property rights is difficult, unpredictable and expensive, and many of our or our licensors’ or collaboration partners’ adversaries in these proceedings may have the ability to dedicate substantially greater resources to prosecuting these legal actions than we or our licensors or collaboration partners can. Accordingly, despite our or our licensors’ or collaboration partners’ efforts, we or our licensors or collaboration partners may not prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating intellectual property rights we own or control, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the European Union and the United States. We may fail in enforcing our rights—in which case our competitors may be permitted to use our technology without being required to pay us any license fees. In addition, however, litigation involving our patents

38

Table of Contents

carries the risk that one or more of our patents will be held invalid (in whole or in part, on a claim‑by‑claim basis) or held unenforceable. Such an adverse court ruling could allow third parties to commercialize our products or use our SIMPLE Antibody TM, NHance® and ABDEG TM platform technologies, and then compete directly with us, without payment to us.

If we were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our products, the defendant could counterclaim that our patent is invalid or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States or in Europe, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity or unenforceability are commonplace. A claim for a validity challenge may be based on failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, for example, lack of novelty, obviousness or non‑enablement. A claim for unenforceability could involve an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the European Patent Office or the USPTO or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability during patent litigation is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on one or more of our products or certain aspects of our SIMPLE Antibody TM, NHance® and ABDEG TM platform technologies. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business. Further, litigation could result in substantial costs and diversion of management resources, regardless of the outcome, and this could harm our business and financial results. Patents and other intellectual property rights also will not protect our technology if competitors design around our protected technology without infringing our patents or other intellectual property rights.

Intellectual property rights of third parties could adversely affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates, such that we could be required to litigate or obtain licenses from third parties in order to develop or market our product candidates. Such litigation or licenses could be costly or not available on commercially reasonable terms.

Our competitive position may suffer if patents issued to third parties or other third‑party intellectual property rights cover our products or elements thereof, our manufacture or uses relevant to our development plans, the targets of our product candidates, or other attributes of our product candidates or our technology. In such cases, we may not be in a position to develop or commercialize products or product candidates unless we successfully pursue litigation to nullify or invalidate the third‑party intellectual property right concerned, or enter into a license agreement with the intellectual property right holder, if available on commercially reasonable terms. We are aware of certain U.S. issued patents held by third parties that some may argue cover certain aspects of our product candidates, including cusatuzumab and ARGX‑111. The patent relating to cusatuzumab is scheduled to expire in 2026, and the patents relating to ARGX‑111 are scheduled to expire between 2024 and 2032. In the event that a patent has not expired at the time of approval of such product candidate and the patent owner were to bring an infringement action against us, we may have to argue that our product, its manufacture or use does not infringe a valid claim of the patent in question. Alternatively, if we were to challenge the validity of any issued U.S. patent in court, we would need to overcome a statutory presumption of validity that attaches to every U.S. patent. This means that in order to prevail, we would need to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of the patent’s claims. There is no assurance that a court would find in our favor on questions of infringement or validity. In the event that a patent is successfully asserted against us such that the patent is found to be valid and enforceable and infringed by our product, unless we obtain a license to such a patent, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, we could be prevented from continuing to develop or commercialize our product. Similarly, the targets for certain of our product candidates have also been the subject of research by other companies, which have filed patent applications or have patents on aspects of the targets or their uses. There can be no assurance any such patents will not be asserted against us or that we will not need to seek licenses from such third parties. We may not be able to secure such licenses on acceptable terms, if at all, and any such litigation would be costly and time‑consuming.

It is also possible that we failed to identify relevant patents or applications. For example, certain U.S. applications filed after November 29, 2000 that will not be filed outside the United States may remain confidential until patents issue. In general, patent applications in the United States and elsewhere are published approximately

39

Table of Contents

18 months after the earliest filing from which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. Therefore, patent applications covering our products or platform technology could have been filed by others without our knowledge. Furthermore, we operate in a highly competitive field, and given our limited resources, it is unreasonable to monitor all patent applications purporting to gain broad coverage in the areas in which we are active. Additionally, pending patent applications which have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our platform technologies, our products or the use of our products.

Third‑party intellectual property right holders, including our competitors, may actively bring infringement claims against us. The granting of orphan drug status in respect of any of our product candidates does not guarantee our freedom to operate and is separate from our risk of possible infringement of third parties’ intellectual property rights. We may not be able to successfully settle or otherwise resolve such infringement claims. If we are unable to successfully settle future claims on terms acceptable to us, we may be required to engage or continue costly, unpredictable and time‑consuming litigation and may be prevented from or experience substantial delays in marketing our products.

If we fail in any such dispute, in addition to being forced to pay damages, we or our licensees may be temporarily or permanently prohibited from commercializing any of our product candidates that are held to be infringing. We might, if possible, also be forced to redesign product candidates so that we no longer infringe the third‑party intellectual property rights. Or, we may be required to seek a license to any such technology that we are found to infringe, which license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. Even if we or our licensors or collaboration partners obtain a license, it may be non‑exclusive (for example, the POTELLIGENT® platform), thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us or our licensors or collaboration partners. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent. Any of these events, even if we were to ultimately prevail, could require us to divert substantial financial and management resources that we would otherwise be able to devote to our business.

In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our or our licensors’ or collaboration partners’ patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation.

Our ability to compete may be adversely affected if we are unsuccessful in defending against any claims by competitors or others that we are infringing upon their intellectual property rights.

The various markets in which we plan to operate are subject to frequent and extensive litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. In addition, companies producing therapeutics to treat and potentially cure cancer have employed intellectual property litigation as a means to gain an advantage over their competitors. As a result, we may be required to defend against claims of intellectual property infringement that may be asserted by our competitors against us and, if the outcome of any such litigation is adverse to us, it may affect our ability to compete effectively.

Our involvement in litigation, and in, e.g., any interference, derivation, reexamination, inter partes review, opposition or post‑grant proceedings or other intellectual property proceedings inside and outside of the European Union or the United States may divert management time from focusing on business operations, could cause us to spend significant amounts of money and may have no guarantee of success. Any current and potential intellectual property litigation also could force us to do one or more of the following:

| · |  | stop selling, incorporating, manufacturing or using our products in the United States or other jurisdictions that use the subject intellectual property;

40

Table of Contents

| · |  | obtain from a third party asserting its intellectual property rights, a license to sell or use the relevant technology, which license may not be available on reasonable terms, or at all, or may be non‑exclusive thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us;

| · |  | redesign those products or processes that use any allegedly infringing or misappropriated technology, which may result in significant cost or delay to us, or which redesign could be technically infeasible; or

| · |  | pay damages, including the possibility of treble damages in a patent case if a court finds us to have willfully infringed certain intellectual property rights.

Intellectual property litigation could cause us to spend substantial resources and distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, this could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of the ADSs. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce our resources available for development activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.

Many of our consultants and employees, including our senior management, were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Some of these consultants and employees executed proprietary rights, non disclosure and non competition agreements in connection with such previous employment. Although we try to ensure that our consultants and employees do not use the proprietary information or know how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these consultants and employees have used or disclosed confidential information or intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such consultant’s or employee’s former employer, or have breached their non competition agreement. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims.

If we fail in prosecuting or defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel or sustain damages. Such intellectual property rights could be awarded to a third party, and we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to commercialize our technology or products. Such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we successfully prosecute or defend against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and distract management.

We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to our product candidates through acquisitions and in‑licenses.

Because our programs may require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business will likely depend in part on our ability to acquire, in‑license, maintain or use these proprietary rights. We may be unable to acquire or in‑license any compositions, methods of use, processes, or other third‑party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for our product candidates. The licensing and acquisition of third‑party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third‑party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities.

41

Table of Contents

For example, we sometimes collaborate with U.S. and non‑U.S. academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development under written agreements with these institutions. Typically, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such option, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified timeframe or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to other parties, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our applicable product candidate or program.

In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third‑party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment. If we are unable to successfully obtain a license to third‑party intellectual property rights necessary for the development of a product candidate or program, we may have to abandon development of that product candidate or program and our business and financial condition could suffer.

If we fail to comply with our obligations under the agreements pursuant to which we license intellectual property rights from third parties, or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we could lose the rights to intellectual property that are important to our business.

We are a party to license agreements under which we are granted rights to intellectual property that are important to our business and we expect that we may need to enter into additional license agreements in the future. Existing license agreements impose, and we expect that future license agreements will impose, various development obligations, payment of royalties and fees based on achieving certain milestones, as well as other obligations. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements, the licensor may have the right to terminate the license. The termination of any license agreements or failure to adequately protect such license agreements could prevent us from commercializing product candidates covered by the licensed intellectual property. Several of our existing license agreements are sublicenses from third parties which are not the original licensor of the intellectual property at issue. Under these agreements, we must rely on our licensor to comply with its obligations under the primary license agreements under which such third party obtained rights in the applicable intellectual property, where we may have no relationship with the original licensor of such rights. If the licensors fail to comply with their obligations under these upstream license agreements, the original third party licensor may have the right to terminate the original license, which may terminate the sublicense. If this were to occur, we would no longer have rights to the applicable intellectual property and, in the case of a sublicense, if we were not able to secure our own direct license with the owner of the relevant rights, which it may not be able to do at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, it may adversely affect our ability to continue to develop and commercialize the product candidates incorporating the relevant intellectual property.

Disputes may arise regarding intellectual property subject to a licensing agreement, including:

| · |  | the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation related issues;

| · |  | the extent to which our technology and processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not subject to the licensing agreement;

| · |  | the sublicensing of patent and other rights under any collaboration relationships we might enter into in the future;

| · |  | our diligence obligations under the license agreement and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations;

| · |  | the ownership of inventions and know how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our licensors and us and our partners; and

| · |  | the priority of invention of patented technology.

42

Table of Contents

If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates

If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected.

Our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names, which we need to build name recognition by potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. If other entities use trademarks similar to ours in different jurisdictions, or have senior rights to ours, it could interfere with our use of our current trademarks throughout the world.

If we do not obtain protection under the Hatch‑Waxman Amendments and similar non‑U.S. legislation for extending the term of patents covering each of our product candidates, our business may be materially harmed.

Patents have a limited duration. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non‑provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates, their manufacture, or use are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive medications, including biosimilar medications. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

Depending upon the timing, duration and conditions of FDA marketing approval of our product candidates, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch‑Waxman Act and similar legislation in the European Union. The Hatch‑Waxman Act permits a patent term extension of up to five years for a patent covering an approved product as compensation for effective patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. The patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval, and only one patent applicable to an approved drug may be extended. However, we may not receive an extension if we fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for that product will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner than we expect. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced, possibly materially.

We enjoy only limited geographical protection with respect to certain patents and may face difficulties in certain jurisdictions, which may diminish the value of intellectual property rights in those jurisdictions.

We often file our first patent application (i.e., priority filing) at the UK Intellectual Property Office, the European Patent Office or the USPTO. International applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, or PCT, are usually filed within twelve months after the priority filing. Based on the PCT filing, national and regional patent applications may be filed in additional jurisdictions where we believe our product candidates may be marketed. We have so far not filed for patent protection in all national and regional jurisdictions where such protection may be available. In addition, we may decide to abandon national and regional patent applications before grant. Finally, the grant proceeding of each national/regional patent is an independent proceeding which may lead to situations in which applications might in some jurisdictions be refused by the relevant patent offices, while granted by others. It

43

Table of Contents

is also quite common that depending on the country, the scope of patent protection may vary for the same product candidate or technology.

Competitors may use our and our licensors’ or collaboration partners’ technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we and our licensors or collaboration partners have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States and the European Union. These products may compete with our product candidates, and our and our licensors’ or collaboration partners’ patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

The laws of some jurisdictions do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws in the United States and the European Union, and companies have encountered significant difficulties in protecting and defending such rights in such jurisdictions. If we or our licensors encounter difficulties in protecting, or are otherwise precluded from effectively protecting, the intellectual property rights important for our business in such jurisdictions, the value of these rights may be diminished and we may face additional competition from others in those jurisdictions.

Some countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, some countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patent. If we or any of our licensors is forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired and our business, results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected.

Proceedings to enforce our and our licensors’ or collaboration partners’ patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our and our licensors’ or collaboration partners’ efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our and our licensors’ or collaboration partners’ patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our and our licensors’ or collaboration partners’ patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us or our licensors or collaboration partners. We or our licensors or collaboration partners may not prevail in any lawsuits that we or our licensors or collaboration partners initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful.

Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats to our competitive advantage and changes in patent laws or patent jurisprudence could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

As is the case with other biotechnology companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involves both technological complexity and legal complexity. Therefore, obtaining and enforcing biopharmaceutical patents is costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. In addition, the America Invents Act, or the AIA, has been enacted in the United States, resulting in significant changes to the U.S. patent system.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations, and may not adequately protect our business, or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. The following examples are illustrative:

| · |  | others may be able to make compounds that are the same as or similar to our product candidates but that are not covered by the claims of the patents that we own or have exclusively licensed.

| · |  | the patents of third parties may have an adverse effect on our business.

44

Table of Contents

| · |  | we or our licensors or any current or future strategic partners might not have been the first to conceive or reduce to practice the inventions covered by the issued patent or pending patent application that we own or have exclusively licensed.

| · |  | we or our licensors or any future strategic partners might not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of our inventions.

| · |  | others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing our intellectual property rights.

| · |  | it is possible that our pending patent applications will not lead to issued patents.

| · |  | issued patents that we own or have exclusively licensed may not provide us with any competitive advantage, or may be held invalid or unenforceable, as a result of legal challenges by our competitors.

| · |  | our competitors might conduct research and development activities in countries where we do not have patent rights and then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive products for sale in our major commercial markets.

| · |  | third parties performing manufacturing or testing for us using our products or technologies could use the intellectual property of others without obtaining a proper license.

| · |  | we may not develop additional technologies that are patentable; and

| · |  | the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business. In particular, our product candidates may in the future be tested for new indications. If one of our product candidates would prove to be effective against a specific new indication, we may be confronted with existing patents covering such indication.

An important change introduced by the AIA is that, as of March 16, 2013, the United States transitioned to a “first‑to‑file” system for deciding which party should be granted a patent when two or more patent applications are filed by different parties claiming the same invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO after that date but before us could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by the third party. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application, but circumstances could prevent us from promptly filing patent applications on our inventions.

Among some of the other changes introduced by the AIA are changes that limit where a patentee may file a patent infringement suit and providing opportunities for third parties to challenge any issued patent in the USPTO. This applies to all of our U.S. patents, even those issued before March 16, 2013. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in U.S. federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. The AIA and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents.

Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents

45

Table of Contents

could change in unpredictable ways that could weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

Confidentiality agreements with employees and others may not adequately prevent disclosure of trade secrets and protect other proprietary information.

We consider proprietary trade secrets, confidential know‑how and unpatented know‑how to be important to our business. We may rely on trade secrets or confidential know‑how to protect our technology, especially where patent protection is believed to be of limited value. However, trade secrets and confidential know‑how are difficult to maintain as confidential.

To protect this type of information against disclosure or appropriation by competitors, our policy is to require our employees, consultants, contractors and advisors to enter into confidentiality agreements with us. However, current or former employees, consultants, contractors and advisers may unintentionally or willfully disclose our confidential information to competitors, and confidentiality agreements may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. Enforcing a claim that a third party obtained illegally and is using trade secrets or confidential know‑how is expensive, time consuming and unpredictable. The enforceability of confidentiality agreements may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Furthermore, if a competitor lawfully obtained or independently developed any of our trade secrets, we would have no right to prevent such competitor from using that technology or information to compete with us, which could harm our competitive position. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating the trade secret.

Failure to obtain or maintain trade secrets or confidential know‑how trade protection could adversely affect our competitive position. Moreover, our competitors may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and may even apply for patent protection in respect of the same. If successful in obtaining such patent protection, our competitors could limit our use of our trade secrets or confidential know‑how.

Under certain circumstances, we may also decide to publish some know‑how to attempt to prevent others from obtaining patent rights covering such know‑how.

Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non‑compliance with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance and annuity fees on any issued patent are due to be paid to the USPTO, the European Patent Office and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent. The USPTO, the European Patent Office and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Non‑compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non‑payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If we or our licensors or collaboration partners fail to maintain the patents and patent applications covering our product candidates, our competitors might be able to enter the market, which would have an adverse effect on our business.

46

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Our Organization and Operations

Our future growth and ability to compete depends on retaining our key personnel and recruiting additional qualified personnel.

Our success depends upon the continued contributions of our key management, scientific and technical personnel, many of whom have been instrumental for us and have substantial experience with our therapies and related technologies. These key management individuals include the members of our board of directors and executive management, including Tim Van Hauwermeiren, our co‑founder and Chief Executive Officer; Keith Woods, our Chief Operating Officer; Eric Castaldi, our Chief Financial Officer; Prof. Hans de Haard, our co‑founder and Chief Scientific Officer; Wim Parys, our Chief Medical Officer; Arjen Lemmen, our VP Corporate Development & Strategy; and Dirk Beeusaert, our General Counsel.

The loss of key managers and senior scientists could delay our research and development activities. In addition, our ability to compete in the highly competitive biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified management, scientific and medical personnel. Many other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions that we compete against for qualified personnel have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer history in the industry than we do. Therefore, we might not be able to attract or retain these key persons on conditions that are economically acceptable. Furthermore, we will need to recruit new managers and qualified scientific, commercial, regulatory and financial personnel to develop our business if we expand into fields that will require additional skills. Our inability to attract and retain these key persons could prevent us from achieving our objectives and implementing our business strategy, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and prospects.

We expect to expand our development, regulatory and sales and marketing capabilities, and as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations.

We expect to experience significant growth in the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of drug development, regulatory affairs and sales and marketing. To manage our anticipated future growth, we must continue to implement and improve our managerial, operational and financial systems, expand our facilities and continue to recruit and train additional qualified personnel. Due to our limited financial resources and the limited experience of our management team in managing a company with such anticipated growth, we may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations or recruit and train additional qualified personnel. The expansion of our operations may lead to significant costs and may divert our management and business development resources. Any inability to manage growth could delay the execution of our business plans or disrupt our operations.

We may not be able to integrate efficiently or achieve the expected benefits of any acquisitions of complementary businesses, product candidates or technologies.

Since our inception in 2008, we have grown organically without any acquisitions. Should we in the future contemplate to acquire any complementary business, product candidates or additional technologies, our ability to integrate and manage businesses, product candidates or technologies that we have acquired or may acquire effectively will depend upon a number of factors including the size of the acquired business, the complexity of any product candidate or technology and the resulting difficulty of integrating the acquired business’s operations, if any. Our relationship with current employees or employees of any acquired business may become impaired. We may also be subject to unexpected claims and liabilities arising from such acquisitions. These claims and liabilities could be costly to defend, could be material to our financial position and might exceed either the limitations of any applicable indemnification provisions or the financial resources of the indemnifying parties. There can also be no assurance that we will be able to assess ongoing profitability and identify all actual or potential liabilities of a business, product candidate or technology prior to its acquisition. If we acquire businesses, product candidates or technologies that result in assuming unforeseen liabilities in respect of which it has not obtained contractual protections or for which protection is not available, this could materially adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

47

Table of Contents

Our business is subject to economic, political, regulatory and other risks associated with international operations.

Our business is subject to risks associated with conducting business internationally. Accordingly, our future results could be harmed by a variety of factors, including:

| · |  | economic weakness, including inflation, or political instability in particular non‑U.S. economies and markets;

| · |  | differing regulatory requirements for drug approvals;

| · |  | differing jurisdictions could present different issues for securing, maintaining or obtaining freedom to operate in such jurisdictions;

| · |  | potentially reduced protection for intellectual property rights;

| · |  | difficulties in compliance with different, complex and changing laws, regulations and court systems of multiple jurisdictions and compliance with a wide variety of foreign laws, treaties and regulations;

| · |  | changes in regulations and customs, tariffs and trade barriers;

| · |  | changes in currency exchange rates of the euro, U.S. dollar, British pound and Swiss francs and currency controls;

| · |  | changes in a specific country’s or region’s political or economic environment;

| · |  | trade protection measures, import or export licensing requirements or other restrictive actions by governments;

| · |  | differing reimbursement regimes and price controls in certain international markets;

| · |  | negative consequences from changes in tax laws;

| · |  | compliance with tax, employment, immigration and labor laws for employees living or traveling abroad, including, for example, the variable tax treatment in different jurisdictions of stock options granted under our share-based employee incentive plans;

| · |  | workforce uncertainty in countries where labor unrest is more common than in the United States;

| · |  | litigation or administrative actions resulting from claims against us by current or former employees or consultants individually or as part of class actions, including claims of wrongful terminations, discrimination, misclassification or other violations of labor law or other alleged conduct;

| · |  | litigation resulting from claims against us by third parties, including claims of breach of noncompete and confidentiality provisions of our employees’ former employment agreements with such third parties;

| · |  | difficulties associated with staffing and managing international operations, including differing labor relations;

| · |  | production shortages resulting from any events affecting raw material supply or manufacturing capabilities abroad; and

48

Table of Contents

| · |  | business interruptions resulting from geo‑political actions, including war and terrorism, or natural disasters including earthquakes, typhoons, floods and fires.

Natural disasters, geopolitical unrest, war, terrorism, public health issues or other catastrophic events could disrupt the supply, delivery or demand of products, which could negatively affect our operations and performance.

We are subject to the risk of disruption by earthquakes, floods and other natural disasters, fire, power shortages, geopolitical unrest, war, terrorist attacks and other hostile acts, public health issues, epidemics or pandemics and other events beyond our control and the control of the third parties on which we depend. Any of these catastrophic events, whether in the United States or abroad, may have a strong negative impact on the global economy, our employees, facilities, partners, suppliers, distributors or customers, and could decrease demand for our products, create delays and inefficiencies in our supply chain and make it difficult or impossible for us to deliver products to our customers.

For example, the global spread of COVID-19 has resulted in extended shutdowns of businesses around the world, including in the United States and the European Union, and may directly affect our own operations and the operations of our key business partners. Global health concerns, such as COVID-19, could also result in social, economic, and labor instability in the countries in which we or the third parties with whom we engage operate. We may also take temporary precautionary measures intended to help minimize the risk of COVID-19 to our employees, including temporarily requiring our employees to work remotely, suspending non-essential travel worldwide for our employees and discouraging employee attendance at industry events and in-person work-related meetings. These measures could negatively affect our business. COVID-19 has also caused volatility in the global financial markets and threatened a slowdown in the global economy, which may negatively affect our ability to raise additional capital on attractive terms or at all. We cannot presently predict the scope and severity of any potential business shutdowns or disruptions, but if we or any of the third parties with whom we engage, including the suppliers, contract manufacturers, clinical trial sites, regulators and other third parties with whom we conduct business, were to experience shutdowns or other business disruptions, our ability to conduct our business in the manner and on the timelines presently planned could be materially and negatively impacted. It is also possible that global health concerns such as this one could disproportionately impact the clinical sites in which we conduct any of our clinical trials, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and our results of operation and financial condition.

In addition, a catastrophic event that results in the destruction or disruption of our data centers or our critical business or information technology systems would severely affect our ability to conduct normal business operations and, as a result, our operating results would be adversely affected.

We have obtained significant funding from agencies of the government of the Flemish region of Belgium and have benefited from certain research and development incentives. The tax authorities may challenge our eligibility for or our calculation of such incentives.

We have contracted over the past years numerous funding agreements with agencies of the Flemish government to partially finance our research and development programs. These funding agreements are subject to various criteria linked to employment and investment in the Flemish region of Belgium. We have committed to establish our operational site in the Flemish region, which must remain our major effective operational site, and to maintain our site and all our existing activities, including research and development in the Flemish region. Similarly, our funding agreement with one such agency of the Flemish government requires us to maintain substantial research and development activities in the Flemish region. Such undertakings restrict our ability to choose the most convenient or cost‑effective location of our premises.

If we were to breach these contractual obligations, we may be held liable by the agencies of the Flemish government with which we have funding agreements for any damage incurred by the such agencies resulting from the breach of contract and we could be required to reimburse in full the subsidies granted by such agencies.

49

Table of Contents

Further, pursuant to the general terms of each grant, certain Flemish agencies are entitled to re‑evaluate the subsidies granted to us in case of a fundamental change in our shareholding base, which is not defined in the general terms, but we believe would involve a change of control of us. Any such reevaluation could negatively impact the funding that we receive or have received from the Flemish agencies.

The research and development incentives from which we have benefited as a company active in research and development in Belgium can be offset against Belgian corporate income tax due. The excess portion may be refunded at the end of a five‑year fiscal period for the Belgian research and development incentive. The research and development incentives are both calculated based on the amount of eligible research and development expenditure. The Belgian tax authorities may audit each research and development program in respect of which a tax credit has been claimed and assess whether it qualifies for the tax credit regime. The tax authorities may challenge our eligibility for, or our calculation of, certain tax reductions or deductions in respect of our research and development activities and, should such a claim of the Belgian tax administration be successful, we may be liable for additional corporate income tax, and penalties and interest related thereto, which could have a significant impact on our results of operations and future cash flows. Furthermore, if the Belgian government decide to eliminate, or reduce the scope or the rate of, the research and development incentive benefit, either of which it could decide to do at any time, our results of operations could be adversely affected.

Exchange rate fluctuations or abandonment of the euro currency may materially affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Due to the international scope of our operations, our assets, earnings and cash flows are influenced by movements in exchange rates of several currencies, particularly the U.S. dollar, British pound and Swiss francs. Our functional currency is the euro and the majority of our operating expenses are paid in euros, but we also receive payments from our main business partners Janssen, AbbVie and Shire in U.S. dollars and we regularly acquire services, consumables and materials in U.S. dollars, Swiss francs and British pounds. Further, potential future revenue may be derived from abroad, particularly from the United States. As a result, our business and share price may be affected by fluctuations in foreign exchange rates between the euro and these other currencies, which may also have a significant impact on our reported results of operations and cash flows from period to period. Currently, we do not have any exchange rate hedging arrangements in place.

In addition, the possible abandonment of the euro by one or more members of the European Union could materially affect our business in the future. Despite measures taken by the European Union to provide funding to certain European Union member states in financial difficulties and by a number of European countries to stabilize their economies and reduce their debt burdens, it is possible that the euro could be abandoned in the future as a currency by countries that have adopted its use. This could lead to the re‑introduction of individual currencies in one or more European Union member states, or in more extreme circumstances, the abandonment of the euro or the dissolution of the European Union. The effects on our business of a potential dissolution of the European Union, the exit of one or more European Union member states from the European Union or the abandonment of the euro as a currency, are impossible to predict with certainty, and any such events could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We face a compliance burden from an organizational and regulatory perspective as a European public company with limited liability under Dutch law with our shares listed on Euronext Brussels and the Nasdaq Stock Exchange and with the majority of our operations outside the Netherlands.

We face a compliance burden from an organizational and regulatory perspective as a European public company with limited liability under Dutch law with our shares listed on Euronext Brussels and with the majority of our operations outside the Netherlands. For example, we continue to need the services provided by our independent auditors as required under both Dutch law in respect of argenx SE and Belgian law in respect of argenx BV and would continue to owe increased fees in respect thereof.

50

Table of Contents

Recent developments relating to the United Kingdom’s referendum vote in favor of withdrawal from the European Union could adversely affect us.

In June 2016, a majority of the eligible members of the electorate in the United Kingdom voted to withdraw from the European Union in a national referendum, commonly referred to as “Brexit.” The United Kingdom and the European Union agreed to a withdrawal agreement, or the Withdrawal Agreement. The Withdrawal Agreement was approved by the U.K. Parliament and the United Kingdom formally left the European Union on January 31, 2020. Under the Withdrawal Agreement, the United Kingdom is subject to a transition period until December 31, 2020, or the Transition Period, during which European Union rules will continue to apply.

Negotiations between the United Kingdom and the European Union are expected to continue in relation to the customs and trading relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union following the expiry of the Transition Period.

The uncertainty concerning the United Kingdom’s legal, political and economic relationship with the European Union after the Transition Period may be a source of instability in the international markets, create significant currency fluctuations, and/or otherwise adversely affect trading agreements or similar cross-border co-operation arrangements (whether economic, tax, fiscal, legal, regulatory or otherwise).

These developments, or the perception that any of them could occur, have had, and may continue to have, a significant adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets, and could significantly reduce global market liquidity and limit the ability of key market participants to operate in certain financial markets. In particular, it could also lead to a period of considerable uncertainty in relation to the U.K. financial and banking markets, as well as on the regulatory process in Europe. Asset valuations, currency exchange rates and credit ratings may also be subject to increased market volatility.

If the United Kingdom and the EU are unable to negotiate acceptable trading and customs terms or if other EU Member States pursue withdrawal, barrier-free access between the United Kingdom and other EU Member States or among the EEA overall could be diminished or eliminated. The long-term effects of Brexit will depend on any agreements (or lack thereof) between the United Kingdom and the EU and, in particular, any arrangements for the United Kingdom to retain access to EU markets after the Transition Period. Such a withdrawal from the EU is unprecedented, and it is unclear how the U.K. access to the European single market for goods, capital, services and labor within the EU, or single market, and the wider commercial, legal and regulatory environment, will impact our U.K. operations.

We may also face new regulatory costs and challenges that could have an adverse effect on our operations and development programs. For example, the United Kingdom could lose the benefits of global trade agreements negotiated by the EU on behalf of its members, which may result in increased trade barriers that could make our doing business in the EU and the EEA more difficult. There may continue to be economic uncertainty surrounding the consequences of Brexit, which could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and market price of our common stock.

We are exposed to unanticipated changes in tax laws and regulations, adjustments to our tax provisions, exposure to additional tax liabilities, or forfeiture of our tax assets.

The determination of our provision for income taxes and other tax liabilities requires significant judgment, including the adoption of certain accounting policies and our determination of whether our deferred tax assets are, and will remain, tax effective. We cannot guarantee that our interpretation or structure will not be questioned by the relevant tax authorities, or that the relevant tax laws and regulations, or the interpretation thereof, including through tax rulings, by the relevant tax authorities, will not be subject to change. Any adverse outcome of such a review may lead to adjustments in the amounts recorded in our financial statements, and could have a materially adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition.

51

Table of Contents

We are subject to laws and regulations on tax levies and other charges or contributions in different countries, including transfer pricing and tax regulations for the compensation of personnel and third parties. Dealings between current and former group companies, as well as additional companies that may form part of our group in the future, are subject to transfer pricing regulations, which may be subject to change and could affect us.

Our effective tax rates could be adversely affected by changes in tax laws, treaties and regulations, both internationally and domestically, or the interpretation thereof by the relevant tax authorities, including changes to the patent income deduction, possible changes to the corporate income tax base, wage withholding tax incentive for qualified research and development personnel in Belgium and other tax incentives and the implementation of new tax incentives such as the innovation deduction. An increase of the effective tax rates could have an adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

In addition, we may not be able to use, or changes in tax regulations may affect the use of, certain tax assets or credits that we have built over the years. For instance, as of December 31, 2019, we had €160.0 million of consolidated tax loss carry forwards. In general, some of these tax loss carry forwards may be forfeited in whole, or in part, as a result of various transactions, or their utilization may be restricted by statutory law in the relevant jurisdiction. Any corporate reorganization by us or any transaction relating to our shareholding structure may result in partial or complete forfeiture of tax losses carry forwards. For instance, under Belgian law, argenx BV may lose its tax loss carry forwards in case of a change of control, through an acquisition or otherwise, not meeting legitimate financial or economic needs as well as in case of a tax neutral reorganization, such as a merger or a demerger, involving argenx BV. The tax burden would increase if profits, if any, could not be offset against tax loss carry forwards.

Risks Related to the ADSs

The price of the ADSs may be volatile and may fluctuate due to factors beyond our control. An active public trading market may not be sustained.

The trading price of the ADSs and the ordinary shares has fluctuated, and is likely to continue to fluctuate, substantially. The trading price of those securities depends on a number of factors, including those described in this “Risk Factors” section, many of which are beyond our control and may not be related to our operating performance. In addition, although the ADSs are listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market and our ordinary shares are listed on Euronext Brussels, we cannot assure you that a trading market for those securities will be maintained.

The market price of the ADSs may fluctuate significantly due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control, including:

| · |  | positive or negative results of testing and clinical trials by us, strategic partners or competitors;

| · |  | delays in entering into strategic relationships with respect to development or commercialization of our product candidates or entry into strategic relationships on terms that are not deemed to be favorable to us;

| · |  | technological innovations or commercial product introductions by us or competitors;

| · |  | changes in government regulations;

| · |  | developments concerning proprietary rights, including patents and litigation matters;

| · |  | public concern relating to the commercial value or safety of any of our product candidates;

| · |  | financing or other corporate transactions;

52

Table of Contents

| · |  | publication of research reports or comments by securities or industry analysts;

| · |  | general market conditions in the pharmaceutical industry or in the economy as a whole;

| · |  | price and volume fluctuations attributable to inconsistent trading volume levels of the ADSs and/or ordinary shares; or

| · |  | other events and factors, many of which are beyond our control.

These and other market and industry factors may cause the market price and demand for the ADSs and ordinary shares to fluctuate substantially, regardless of our actual operating performance, which may limit or prevent investors from readily selling their ADSs or ordinary shares and may otherwise negatively affect the liquidity of our ADSs and ordinary shares. In addition, the stock market in general, and biopharmaceutical companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies.

Future sales, or the possibility of future sales, of a substantial number of our securities could adversely affect the price of the shares and dilute shareholders.

Sales of a substantial number of our ADSs and ordinary shares in the public market, or the perception that these sales might occur, could depress the market price of our ADSs and ordinary shares and could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. We are also unable to predict the effect that such sales may have on the prevailing market price of our ADSs and ordinary shares.

Fluctuations in exchange rates may increase the risk of holding our ADSs and ordinary shares.

Due to the international scope of our operations, our assets, earnings and cash flows are influenced by movements in exchange rates of several currencies, particularly the euro, U.S. dollar, British pound and Swiss franc. Our functional currency is the euro, and the majority of our operating expenses are paid in euros, but we also receive payments from our main business partners Janssen, AbbVie and Shire in U.S. dollars and we regularly acquire services, consumables and materials in U.S. dollars, Swiss francs and British pounds. Further, potential future revenue may be derived from abroad, particularly from the United States. As a result, our business and the price of the ADSs and ordinary shares may be affected by fluctuations in foreign exchange rates between the euro and these other currencies, which may also have a significant impact on our reported results of operations and cash flows from period to period. Currently, we do not have any exchange rate hedging arrangements in place.

Moreover, because our ordinary shares currently trade on Euronext Brussels in euros, and the ADSs trade on the Nasdaq Global Select Market in U.S. dollars, fluctuations in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the euro may result in temporary differences between the value of the ADSs and the value of our ordinary shares, which may result in heavy trading by investors seeking to exploit such differences. In order to finance the growth of our activities in the United States, we have invested in U.S. dollar denominated cash deposit accounts and in current financial assets with a significant portion of the proceeds from our initial U.S. public offering completed in May 2017 and our follow-on U.S. public offerings completed in December 2017 and September 2018. Depending on the exchange rate fluctuations of the U.S. dollar, this may result in unrealized exchange rate losses which may impact negatively the reporting of our cash, cash equivalents and current financial assets at reporting dates when translating to euros these U.S. denominated cash deposits accounts and current financial assets. In addition, as a result of fluctuations in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the euro, the U.S. dollar equivalent of the proceeds that a holder of the ADSs would receive upon the sale on Euronext Brussels of any ordinary shares withdrawn from the depositary and the U.S. dollar equivalent of any cash dividends paid in euros on our shares represented by the ADSs could also decline.

53

Table of Contents

Holders of ADSs are not treated as holders of our ordinary shares.

Holders of ADSs are not treated as holders of our ordinary shares, unless they withdraw the ordinary shares underlying their ADSs in accordance with the deposit agreement and applicable laws and regulations. The depositary is the holder of the ordinary shares underlying the ADSs. Holders of ADSs therefore do not have any rights as holders of our ordinary shares, other than the rights that they have pursuant to the deposit agreement. See “Item 12.D. —American Depositary Shares.”

Holders of ADSs may be subject to limitations on the transfer of their ADSs and the withdrawal of the underlying ordinary shares.

ADSs are transferable on the books of the depositary. However, the depositary may close its books at any time or from time to time when it deems expedient in connection with the performance of its duties. The depositary may refuse to deliver, transfer or register transfers of ADSs generally when our books or the books of the depositary are closed, or at any time if we or the depositary think it is advisable to do so because of any requirement of law, government or governmental body, or under any provision of the deposit agreement, or for any other reason, subject to the right of ADS holders to cancel their ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares. Temporary delays in the cancellation of your ADSs and withdrawal of the underlying ordinary shares may arise because the depositary has closed its transfer books or we have closed our transfer books, the transfer of ordinary shares is blocked to permit voting at a shareholders’ meeting or we are paying a dividend on our ordinary shares. In addition, ADS holders may not be able to cancel their ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares when they owe money for fees, taxes and similar charges and when it is necessary to prohibit withdrawals in order to comply with any laws or governmental regulations that apply to ADSs or to the withdrawal of ordinary shares or other deposited securities.

You will not have the same voting rights as the holders of our ordinary shares and may not receive voting materials in time to be able to exercise your right to vote.

Except as described in this annual report and the deposit agreement, holders of the ADSs will not be able to exercise voting rights attaching to the ordinary shares represented by the ADSs. Under the terms of the deposit agreement, holders of the ADSs may instruct the depositary to vote the ordinary shares underlying their ADSs. Otherwise, holders of ADSs will not be able to exercise their right to vote unless they withdraw the ordinary shares underlying their ADSs to vote them in person or by proxy in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and our Articles of Association. Even so, ADS holders may not know about a meeting far enough in advance to withdraw those ordinary shares. If we ask for the instructions of holders of the ADSs, the depositary, upon timely notice from us, will notify ADS holders of the upcoming vote and arrange to deliver our voting materials to them. Upon our request, the depositary will mail to holders a shareholder meeting notice that contains, among other things, a statement as to the manner in which voting instructions may be given. We cannot guarantee that ADS holders will receive the voting materials in time to ensure that they can instruct the depositary to vote the ordinary shares underlying their ADSs. A shareholder is only entitled to participate in, and vote at, the meeting of shareholders, provided that its shares are recorded in its name at midnight (Central European Time) at the end of the twenty eighth day preceding the date of the meeting of shareholders. In addition, the depositary’s liability to ADS holders for failing to execute voting instructions or for the manner of executing voting instructions is limited by the deposit agreement. As a result, holders of ADSs may not be able to exercise their right to give voting instructions or to vote in person or by proxy and they may not have any recourse against the depositary or us if their ordinary shares are not voted as they have requested or if their shares cannot be voted.

Holders of our ordinary shares outside the Netherlands, and ADS holders may not be able to exercise pre-emptive rights or preferential subscription rights, respectively.

In the event of an increase in our share capital, holders of our ordinary shares are generally entitled under Dutch law to full pre-emptive rights, unless these rights are excluded either by a resolution of the shareholders at the General Meeting, or by a resolution of the board of directors (if the board of directors has been designated by the shareholders at the General Meeting for this purpose).

54

Table of Contents

However, making pre-emptive rights available to holders of ordinary shares or ADSs representing ordinary shares also requires compliance with applicable securities laws in the jurisdictions where holders of those securities are located, which we may be unable or unwilling to do. In particular, holders of ordinary shares or ADSs located in the United States would not be able to participate in a pre-emptive rights offering unless we registered the securities to which the rights relate under the Securities Act or an exemption from the registration requirements of that Act is available. In addition, ADS holders would not be able to participate in a pre-emptive rights offering unless we made arrangements with the depositary to extend that offering to ADS holders, which we are not required to do.

We are a Dutch European public company with limited liability (Societas Europaea or SE). The rights of our shareholders may be different from the rights of shareholders in companies governed by the laws of U.S. jurisdictions.

We are a Dutch European public company with limited liability (Societas Europaea or SE). Our corporate affairs are governed by our Articles of Association and by the laws governing companies incorporated in the Netherlands. The rights of shareholders and the responsibilities of members of our board of directors may be different from the rights and obligations of shareholders in companies governed by the laws of U.S. jurisdictions. In the performance of its duties, our board of directors is required by Dutch law to consider the interests of our company, our shareholders, our employees and other stakeholders, in all cases with due observation of the principles of reasonableness and fairness. It is possible that some of these parties will have interests that are different from, or in addition to, your interests as a shareholder.

Because we are a U.S.‑listed public company, our board of directors will be required to devote substantial time to compliance initiatives and corporate governance practices.

As a U.S.-listed public company, we expect to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a public company listed on Euronext Brussels. We are a Dutch European public company with limited liability (Societas Europaea or SE). The Sarbanes‑Oxley Act of 2002, the Dodd‑Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Stock Market, or Nasdaq, and other applicable securities rules and regulations impose various requirements on non‑U.S. reporting public companies, including the establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and corporate governance practices. Our board of directors and other personnel are and will continue to be required to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and regulations will continue to increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time‑consuming and costly. For example, we expect that these rules and regulations may make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, which in turn could make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors.

However, these rules and regulations are often subject to varying interpretations, in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices.

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes‑Oxley Act of 2002, or Section 404, we are required to furnish a report by our board of directors on our internal control over financial reporting. We are also required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. To maintain compliance with these requirements, we must document and evaluate our internal control over financial reporting, which is challenging and involves substantial accounting expenses. In this regard, we will need to dedicate internal resources, including significant management time, potentially engage outside consultants and adopt a detailed work plan to assess and document the adequacy of internal control over financial reporting, continue steps to improve control processes as appropriate, validate through testing that controls are functioning as documented and implement a continuous reporting and improvement process for internal control over financial reporting. Despite our efforts, there is a risk that we will not be able to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective as required by Section 404. If we identify one or more material

55

Table of Contents

weaknesses, it could result in an adverse reaction in the financial markets due to a loss of confidence in the reliability of our financial statements.

Certain significant shareholders own a substantial number of our securities and as a result, may be able to exercise control over us, including the outcome of shareholder votes. These shareholders may have different interests from us or your interests.

We have a number of significant shareholders. For an overview of our current significant shareholders, please see “Item 7A.—Major Shareholders.” As of the date of this annual report, these significant shareholders and their affiliates, in the aggregate, own approximately 51.4% of our ordinary shares and ADSs.

Currently, we are not aware that any of our existing shareholders have entered or will enter into a shareholders’ agreement with respect to the exercise of their voting rights. Nevertheless, depending on the level of attendance at our general meetings of shareholders, or the General Meeting, these significant shareholders could, alone or together, have the ability to determine the outcome of decisions taken at any such General Meeting. Any such voting by these shareholders may not be in accordance with our interests or those of our shareholders. Among other consequences, this concentration of ownership may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control and might therefore negatively affect the market price of the ADSs.

Provisions of our Articles of Association or Dutch corporate law, might deter acquisition bids for us that might be considered favorable and prevent or frustrate any attempt to replace or remove the then board of directors.

Provisions of our Articles of Association may make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of us or effect a change in our board of directors. We have adopted several provisions that may have the effect of making a takeover of our company more difficult or less attractive. These provisions include a requirement that certain matters, including an amendment of our Articles of Association, may only be brought to our shareholders for a vote upon a proposal by our board of directors. These provisions could discourage potential takeover attempts that other shareholders may consider to be in their best interest and could adversely affect the market price of our securities. These provisions may also have the effect of depriving ADS holders of the opportunity to sell their ADSs at a premium.

We do not expect to pay cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

We have not paid any cash dividends since our incorporation. Even if future operations lead to significant levels of distributable profits, we currently intend that any earnings will be reinvested in our business and that cash dividends will not be paid until we have an established revenue stream to support continuing cash dividends. In addition, payment of any future dividends to shareholders would be subject to shareholder approval at our General Meeting, upon proposal of the board of directors, which proposal would be subject to the approval of the majority of the non‑executive directors after taking into account various factors including our business prospects, cash requirements, financial performance and new product development. In addition, payment of future cash dividends may be made only if our shareholders’ equity exceeds the sum of our paid‑in and called‑up share capital plus the reserves required to be maintained by Dutch law or by our Articles of Association. Accordingly, investors cannot rely on cash dividend income from ADSs and any returns on an investment in the ADSs will likely depend entirely upon any future appreciation in the price of the ADSs.

We are not obligated to, and do not comply with, all the best practice provisions of the Dutch Corporate Governance Code, which may affect your rights as a shareholder.

As a Dutch European public company with limited liability (Societas Europaea or SE), we are subject to the Dutch Corporate Governance Code, or the DCGC. The DCGC contains both principles and best practice provisions for board of directors, management boards, supervisory boards, shareholders and general meetings of shareholders, financial reporting, auditors, disclosure, compliance and enforcement standards. The DCGC applies to all Dutch companies listed on a regulated market, including Euronext Brussels. The principles and best practice provisions apply to our board of directors (in relation to role and composition, conflicts of interest and

56

Table of Contents

independency requirements, board committees and remuneration), shareholders and the General Meeting (for example, regarding anti‑takeover protection and our obligations to provide information to our shareholders) and financial reporting (such as external auditor and internal audit requirements). We do not comply with all the best practice provisions of the DCGC. As a Dutch company, we are required to disclose in our annual report, filed in the Netherlands, whether we comply with the provisions of the DCGC. If we do not comply with the provisions of the DCGC (for example, because of a conflicting Nasdaq requirement or otherwise), we must list the reasons for any deviation from the DCGC in our annual report. See “Item 16G.—Corporate Governance.”

Claims of U.S. civil liabilities may not be enforceable against us.

We are incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands. Substantially all of our assets are located outside the United States. The majority of the members of our board of directors reside outside the United States. As a result, it may not be possible for investors to effect service of process within the United States upon such persons or to enforce against them or us in U.S. courts, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws.

The United States currently does not have a treaty with either the Netherlands or Belgium providing for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments, other than arbitration awards, in civil and commercial matters. Consequently, a final judgment for payment given by a court in the United States, whether or not predicated solely upon U.S. securities laws, would not automatically be recognized or enforceable in the Netherlands or Belgium. In order to obtain a judgment which is enforceable in the Netherlands, the party in whose favor a final and conclusive judgment of the U.S. court has been rendered will be required to file its claim with a court of competent jurisdiction in the Netherlands. Such party may submit to the Dutch court the final judgment rendered by the U.S. court. If and to the extent that the Dutch court finds that the jurisdiction of the U.S. court has been based on grounds which are internationally acceptable and that proper legal procedures have been observed, the court of the Netherlands will, in principle, give binding effect to the judgment of the U.S. court, unless such judgment contravenes principles of public policy of the Netherlands. Dutch courts may deny the recognition and enforcement of punitive damages or other awards. Moreover, a Dutch court may reduce the amount of damages granted by a U.S. court and recognize damages only to the extent that they are necessary to compensate actual losses or damages. Enforcement and recognition of judgments of U.S. courts in the Netherlands are solely governed by the provisions of the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure (Wetboek van Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering).

In order to obtain a judgment for the payment of money based on civil liability which is enforceable in Belgium, the judgment must be recognized and be declared enforceable by a Belgian court pursuant to the relevant provisions of the 2004 Belgian Code of Private International Law, or the PIL Code. Recognition or enforcement does not imply a review of the merits of the case and is irrespective of any reciprocity requirement. A U.S. judgment will, however, not be recognized or declared enforceable in Belgium if it infringes upon one or more of the grounds for refusal which are listed in article 25 of the PIL Code. In addition to recognition or enforcement, a judgment by a federal or state court in the United States against us may also serve as evidence in a similar action in a Belgian court if it meets the conditions required for the authenticity of judgments according to the law of the state where it was rendered. In addition, with regard to enforcements by legal proceedings in Belgium (including the recognition of foreign court decisions in Belgium), a registration tax at the rate of 3% of the amount of the judgment is payable by the debtor, if the sum of money which the debtor is ordered to pay by a Belgian court, or by a foreign court judgment that is either (i) automatically enforceable and registered in Belgium, or (ii) rendered enforceable by a Belgian court, exceeds €12,500. The registration tax is payable by the debtor. The debtor is liable for the payment of the registration tax, in the proportion determined by the decision ordering payment or liquidation or determining priority for creditors made or established against it. The debtor(s) are jointly and severally liable in the event that they are ordered to pay jointly and severally. A stamp duty is payable for each original copy of an enforcement judgment rendered by a Belgian court, with a maximum of €1,450.

Based on the lack of a treaty as described above, U.S. investors may not be able to enforce against us or members of our board of directors or certain experts named herein who are residents of the Netherlands or Belgium or countries other than the United States any judgments obtained in U.S. courts in civil and commercial matters, including judgments under the U.S. federal securities laws.

57

Table of Contents

We are a foreign private issuer and, as a result, we are not subject to U.S. proxy rules and are subject to Exchange Act reporting obligations that, to some extent, are more lenient and less frequent than those of a U.S. domestic public company.

We report under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, as a non‑U.S. company with foreign private issuer status. Because we qualify as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act, we are exempt from certain provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to U.S. domestic public companies, including (i) the sections of the Exchange Act regulating the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations in respect of a security registered under the Exchange Act; (ii) the sections of the Exchange Act requiring insiders to file public reports of their stock ownership and trading activities and liability for insiders who profit from trades made in a short period of time; and (iii) the rules under the Exchange Act requiring the filing with the SEC of quarterly reports on Form 10‑Q containing unaudited financial and other specified information, or current reports on Form 8‑K, upon the occurrence of specified significant events. In addition, foreign private issuers are not required to file their annual report on Form 20‑F until 120 days after the end of each fiscal year, while U.S. domestic issuers that are accelerated filers are required to file their annual report on Form 10‑K within 75 days after the end of each fiscal year. Foreign private issuers are also exempt from the Regulation Fair Disclosure, aimed at preventing issuers from making selective disclosures of material information. As a result of the above, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are not foreign private issuers. However, we are subject to Dutch laws and regulations with regard to such matters and intend to furnish quarterly unaudited financial information to the SEC on Form 6‑K.

As a foreign private issuer and as permitted by the listing requirements of Nasdaq, we rely on certain home country governance practices rather than the corporate governance requirements of Nasdaq.

We qualify as a foreign private issuer. As a result, in accordance with the listing requirements of Nasdaq, we rely on home country governance requirements and certain exemptions thereunder rather than relying on the corporate governance requirements of Nasdaq. In accordance with Dutch law and generally accepted business practices, our Articles of Association do not provide quorum requirements generally applicable to General Meetings. To this extent, our practice varies from the requirement of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5620(c), which requires an issuer to provide in its bylaws for a generally applicable quorum, and that such quorum may not be less than one‑third of the outstanding voting stock. Although we must provide shareholders with an agenda and other relevant documents for the General Meeting, Dutch law does not have a regulatory regime for the solicitation of proxies and the solicitation of proxies is not a generally accepted business practice in the Netherlands, thus our practice will vary from the requirement of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5620(b). In addition, we have opted out of certain Dutch shareholder approval requirements for the issuance of securities in connection with certain events such as the acquisition of stock or assets of another company, the establishment of or amendments to equity‑based compensation plans for employees, a change of control of us and certain private placements. To this extent, our practice varies from the requirements of Nasdaq Rule 5635, which generally requires an issuer to obtain shareholder approval for the issuance of securities in connection with such events. For an overview of our corporate governance principles, see “Item 16G.—Corporate Governance.” Accordingly, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are subject to these Nasdaq requirements.

We may lose our foreign private issuer status which would then require us to comply with the Exchange Act’s domestic reporting regime and cause us to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses.

We are a foreign private issuer, and therefore we are not required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. We may no longer be a foreign private issuer as of June 30, 2019 (the end of our second fiscal quarter in the fiscal year after our initial U.S. public offering), which would require us to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to U.S. domestic issuers as of January 1, 2020 and would also trigger a 10-K filing for the year ended December 31, 2019. In order to maintain our current status as a foreign private issuer, either (a) a majority of our ordinary shares must be either directly or indirectly owned of record by non‑residents of the United States or (b)(i) a majority of our executive officers or directors may not be U.S. citizens or residents, (ii) more than 50% of our assets cannot be located in the United States and (iii) our business must be

58

Table of Contents

administered principally outside the United States. As of March 16, 2020, we believe at least 50% of our outstanding ordinary shares were held by U.S. residents (assuming that all our ordinary shares represented by ADSs were held by residents of the United States). If we lose this status, we would be required to comply with the Exchange Act reporting and other requirements applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, which are more detailed and extensive than the requirements for foreign private issuers. We may also be required to make changes in our corporate governance practices in accordance with various SEC and Nasdaq rules. The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws if we are required to comply with the reporting requirements applicable to a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly higher than the cost we would incur as a foreign private issuer. As a result, we expect that a loss of foreign private issuer status would increase our legal and financial compliance costs and would make some activities highly time consuming and costly. We also expect that if we were required to comply with the rules and regulations applicable to U.S. domestic issuers, it would make it more difficult and expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, shareholders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of the ADSs.

Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, are designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by us conducted in connection with Section 404, or any subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of the ADSs.

Our management is required to assess the effectiveness of our internal controls and procedures annually and is required to issue an annual report on internal control over financial reporting, and our independent registered public accounting firm is now required to undertake an assessment of our internal control over financial reporting, which could detect problems that our management's assessment might not. Undetected material weaknesses in our internal controls could lead to financial statement restatements and require us to incur the expense of remediation. The rules governing the standards that must be met for our management to assess our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act are complex and require significant documentation, testing and possible remediation. These stringent standards require that our audit committee be advised and regularly updated on management’s review of internal control over financial reporting in connection with issuing our consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Moreover, if we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 applicable to us in a timely manner, or if we or our independent registered public accounting firm identifies deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses, the market price of the ADSs or ordinary shares could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the SEC or other regulatory authorities, which would require additional financial and management resources. Furthermore, investor perceptions of our company may suffer if deficiencies are found, and this could cause a decline in the market price of the ADSs or ordinary shares. Irrespective of compliance with Section 404, any failure of our internal control over financial reporting could have a material adverse effect on our stated operating results and harm our reputation. If we are unable to implement these requirements effectively or efficiently, it could harm our operations, financial reporting, or financial results and could result in an adverse opinion on our internal control over financial reporting from our independent registered public accounting firm.

59

Table of Contents

If securities or industry analysts cease coverage of us, or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, the price of the ADSs and our trading volume could decline.

The trading market for the ADSs will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. If no or too few securities or industry analysts cover us, the trading price for the ADSs would likely be negatively affected. If one or more of the analysts who cover us downgrade the ADSs or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, the price of the ADSs would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of us or fail to publish reports on us regularly, demand for the ADSs could decrease, which might cause the price of the ADSs and trading volume to decline.

We do not anticipate being treated as a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes for the 2019 taxable year, but this conclusion is a factual determination that is made annually and thus may be subject to change. If we were to qualify as a PFIC, this could result in adverse U.S. tax consequences to certain U.S. holders.

Generally, if, for any taxable year, at least 75% of our gross income is passive income, or at least 50% of the value of our assets is attributable to assets that produce passive income or are held for the production of passive income, including cash, we would be characterized as a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes. For purposes of these tests, passive income includes dividends, interest, and gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. Our status as a PFIC depends on the composition of our income and the composition and value of our assets (for which purpose the total value of our assets may be determined in part by the market value of the ordinary shares and the ADSs, which are subject to change) from time to time. If we are characterized as a PFIC, U.S. holders of ADSs may suffer adverse tax consequences, including having gains realized on the sale of ADSs treated as ordinary income, rather than capital gain, the loss of the preferential rate applicable to dividends received on ADSs by individuals who are U.S. holders, and having interest charges apply to distributions by us and the proceeds of sales of ADSs. See “Item 10.E—Taxation—Certain Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations to U.S. Holders—Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations.”

Based upon the expected value of our assets, including any goodwill, and the expected composition of our income and assets, we do not anticipate being treated as a PFIC with respect to the 2019 taxable year. However, our status as a PFIC is a fact‑intensive determination made on an annual basis, and we cannot provide any assurances regarding our PFIC status for the current, prior or future taxable years.

ITEM 4. INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY

A. HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMPANY

Our legal and commercial name is argenx SE. We were incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands on April 25, 2008 as a private company with limited liability (besloten vennootschap met beperkte aansprakelijkheid). On May 28, 2014, we converted to a Dutch public company with limited liability (naamloze vennootschap). On April 26, 2017, we converted to a Dutch European public company with limited liability (Societas Europaea or SE). Our official seat is in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and our registered office is at Willemstraat 5, 4811 AH, Breda, the Netherlands. We are registered with the trade register of the Dutch Chamber of Commerce under number 24435214. Our telephone number is +32 9 310 34 00. Our website address is http://www.argenx.com. The information contained on, or that can be accessed through, our website is not a part of, and shall not be incorporated by reference into, this annual report. We have included our website address as an inactive textual reference only. The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at http://www.sec.gov. The registered agent for service of process in the United States is CT Corporation System, with an address at 111 8th Avenue, New York, NY 10011.

60

Table of Contents

Our actual capital expenditures for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2018 and 2019 amounted to €0.4 million, €0.7 million and €41.7 million respectively. These capital expenditures primarily consisted of office and laboratory equipment and information technology equipment. We expect our capital expenditures to increase in absolute terms in the near term as we continue to advance our research and development programs and grow our operations. We anticipate our capital expenditure in 2020 to be financed from the cash flows from operating activities and cash reserves. For more information on our capital expenditures, see the section of this annual report titled “Item 5.B.—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Cash Flows—Operating and Capital Expenditure Requirements.”

Overview of Our Restructuring

Background

From our incorporation in 2008 until August 28, 2009, our research and development activities were performed in the Netherlands by argenx N.V. and its legal predecessors arGEN-X B.V. and arGEN-X N.V. On August 28, 2009, we moved our research and development activities to Belgium for various business reasons. Accordingly, as of August 28, 2009, our wholly owned subsidiary, argenx BV, or the Belgian BV, has performed all research and development activities under a license provided by argenx N.V. and has assigned all resulting intellectual property rights to argenx N.V. As a consequence, argenx N.V. remained the legal owner of the intellectual property rights relating to our platform technologies until these intellectual property rights were transferred to argenx BV on May 5, 2017 as described below.

Since all our research and development activities have been performed by the Belgian BV since August 28, 2009, we considered that value creation was not adequately aligned with our intellectual property ownership structures as required under the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting project of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. In order to achieve such alignment, on May 5, 2017, we transferred the legal ownership of all intellectual property rights of argenx SE to the Belgian argenx BV, effective retroactively as of January 1, 2017. As a result, as of January 1, 2017, (i) argenx BV holds all legal and economic ownership of our intellectual property rights, and (ii) the research and development agreement between argenx SE and the Belgian BV has been terminated.

Dutch Tax Consequences of Our Restructuring

The tax consequences of our restructuring were discussed with the Dutch tax authorities and the Belgian tax authorities. On April 20, 2017, we reached an agreement with the Dutch tax authorities that the economic ownership of our intellectual property rights was effectively transferred from argenx SE to the Belgian BV as of August 28, 2009. Since then, argenx SE should have been treated only as the legal owner of our intellectual property rights, for which it should have received a low but stable remuneration only, instead of being the party absorbing all research and development costs. In order to compensate argenx SE for the restructuring, the Belgian BV has paid an arm’s length compensation to argenx SE in the form of an indemnification payment effective as of January 1, 2017 consisting of (i) compensation for the value of the economic ownership of our intellectual property rights as of September 2009 to January 1, 2017, (ii) accrued interest thereon and (iii) an adjustment for the difference between (a) the applied transfer pricing policy and (b) the appropriate transfer pricing policy taking into account the transfer of economic ownership as of August 28, 2009 in the period from September 2009 through 2016. The total indemnification payment amounted to €80 million and was charged by argenx SE to the Belgian BV. argenx SE was able to off-set the full amount of its tax loss carry forwards against the taxable profits it realized as a result of the indemnification payment. The transfer of legal ownership of our intellectual property rights from argenx SE to the Belgian BV as of January 1, 2017 is an integral part of the restructuring and does not result in an additional transfer subject to tax in the Netherlands. Altogether, the restructuring resulted in a taxable amount for argenx SE of €2.4 million, which has been subject to corporate income tax in the Netherlands at a tax rate of 25% (20% for the first €200,000 of taxable income).

61

Table of Contents

Belgian Tax Consequences of Our Restructuring

In view of the above considerations, on April 4, 2017, we requested a tax ruling from the Belgian ruling commission with respect to the following aspects of the restructuring:

-the indemnification payment that was paid by the Belgian BV to argenx SE for the restructuring does not deviate from what would have been agreed by two independent companies in a similar relational situation, including the previously built relationships which have effect in the framework of the restructuring and will not give rise to an adjustment on the basis of article 185 §2 of the Belgian Income Tax Code;

-the Belgian BV will not grant or receive an abnormal or benevolent advantage within the meaning of Articles 26, 79 and 207 of the Belgian Income Tax Code;

-the indemnification payment paid by the Belgian BV to argenx SE for the restructuring is expected to qualify as a deductible cost for the Belgian BV under article 49 §2 of the Belgian Income Tax Code, being (partly) incurred in the fiscal period in which the restructuring has been implemented and (partly) incurred in the following years in the form of a periodic amortization if the accounting treatment of the restructuring requires that the compensation is to be (partly) activated; and

-the restructuring was justified by other motives than the avoidance of income taxes within the meaning of Article 344 of the Belgian Income Tax Code.

In 2019, the Company has obtained this tax ruling in Belgium which allows for a treatment of the aforementioned amount as a tax deductible cost in the Belgian subsidiary. In summary, the restructuring has resulted in a taxable amount for argenx SE of €2.4 million subject to Dutch corporate income tax at a tax rate set out above and an elimination of its tax loss carry forwards for Dutch corporate income tax purposes an amount of €77.5 million. On the other hand, the restructuring brings additional deductible costs to the Belgian BV for an amount of up to €80 million.

B. BUSINESS OVERVIEW

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company developing a deep pipeline of differentiated antibody-based therapies for the treatment of severe autoimmune diseases, hematology and cancer. Utilizing our suite of antibody technologies and through our Innovative Access Program (IAP) to explore novel disease biology, we are focused on developing product candidates with the potential to be either first-in-class against novel targets or best-in-class against known, but complex, targets in order to treat diseases with a significant unmet medical need. Through our ‘argenx 2021’ vision we are on track to becoming a global, fully integrated, novel immunology company with the potential launch of our first product, efgartigimod, in the United States in 2021.

Our SIMPLE Antibody™ Platform, based on the powerful llama immune system, together with the powerful IAP allows us to exploit novel and complex targets, and our three antibody Fc engineering technologies are designed to enable us to expand the therapeutic index of our product candidates. Together with our antibody discovery and development expertise, this suite of technologies has enabled us to build our broad pipeline of product candidates in severe autoimmune diseases and hematology/oncology, across all stages of development. Two of our product candidates are in potentially registrational trials in three indications, one is being prepared to enter Phase 3 development in two additional indications, and three product candidates are in earlier stage development.

In September 2018, we launched our first Phase 3 trial, the ADAPT trial, for intravenous (IV) efgartigimod (ARGX‑113), our most advanced product candidate targeting FcRn for the treatment of the rare neurological autoimmune disease myasthenia gravis, or MG. The full data from the Phase 2 trial in myasthenia gravis were reported in April 2018 and were published in the peer-reviewed journal, Neurology, in 2019. Completion of recruitment for the Phase 3 ADAPT trial was announced at the end of 2019 and topline data are expected mid‑2020.

62

Table of Contents

Also, in 2018 we successfully completed the Phase 2 clinical trial for efgartigimod in immune thrombocytopenia, or ITP, a rare hematological autoimmune disorder, and reported for the second time a proof-of-concept for our lead product candidate with strong clinical improvement over placebo. These Phase 2 trial results have been published in the peer-reviewed journal Hematology in December 2019. The first of two potentially registrational Phase 3 trials of IV efgartigimod in ITP, the ADVANCE trial, was initiated in the fourth quarter of 2019.

In both Phase 2 studies in MG and ITP, efgartigimod was observed to have a favorable tolerability profile consistent with that observed in our Phase 1 clinical trial.

In September 2017, we initiated a Phase 2 clinical trial of efgartigimod for the treatment of a third indication, pemphigus vulgaris, or PV, a rare autoimmune blistering (skin) disease. In January 2020, we reported interim data for this Phase 2 proof-of-concept clinical trial where rapid disease control and clinical remission was observed with a favorable tolerability profile.

These first indications and clinical development programs of efgartigimod were based on intravenous (IV) formulated efgartigimod. However, we are also developing a subcutaneous (SC) product formulation designed to enable administration potentially outside the hospital setting. In June 2018, we reported that at the same dose level the SC formulation was comparable across key measures, including half-life, pharmacodynamics (PD) and tolerability, to the IV formulation used in clinical studies to date. In July 2019, we also evaluated a standalone SC formulation of efgartigimod with the ENHANZE® drug delivery technology (licensed from Halozyme) in a Phase 1 clinical trial in healthy volunteers demonstrating a retained PD profile of IV efgartigimod.

We continue to exploit efgartigimod’s pipeline-in-a-product opportunity and, at the end of 2019, we announced the initiation of a proof-of-concept Phase 2 clinical trial in a fourth indication, chronic demyelinating polyneuropathy, or CIDP, a rare neurological autoimmune disease. This Phase 2 trial, ADHERE, will evaluate SC ENHANZE® efgartigimod in patients with CIDP.

Beyond efgartigimod, we continue to co-develop our second lead product candidate, cusatuzumab (ARGX‑110) (targeting CD70) with our collaborator, Cilag GmbH International, an affiliate of the Janssen Pharmaceutuical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, or Cilag, for the rare and aggressive hematological cancer acute myeloid leukemia, or AML, as well as high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome, or MDS. In December 2016, we started the dose-escalation part of the Phase 1/2 clinical trial of cusatuzumab in combination with azacytidine. In December 2018, we reported a 92% response rate in the treated group of newly diagnosed AML patients. The transition into the Phase 2 part of this clinical trial was announced in August 2018. In July 2019, Cilag initiated a registration directed Phase 2 clinical trial, CULMINATE, of cusatuzumab in combination with azacitidine in patients with newly diagnosed AML, exploring two dose levels of cusatuzumab. In addition, a Phase 2 clinical trial in combination with azacytidine and/or venetoclax was launched.

We have a disciplined strategy to maximize the value of our pipeline whereby we plan to retain development and commercialization rights to those product candidates that we believe we can ultimately commercialize successfully on our own, if they are approved. We plan to collaborate on product candidates that we believe have promising potential and benefits in disease areas or patient populations that are better served by the resources of larger biopharmaceutical companies. As such, we have entered into collaborations with a number of biopharmaceutical companies, including our collaboration with Cilag. In January 2019, we received a $300 million upfront payment pursuant to that collaboration and Johnson & Johnson Innovation Inc. invested €176.7 million (or $197.2 million) in the form of an equity investment. In addition, in August 2018, our collaborator AbbVie S.À.R.L exercised its exclusive option to license ARGX‑115 (now code named ABBV‑151), a cancer immunotherapy-focused product candidate against the novel target glycoprotein A repetitions predominant. In March 2019, AbbVie started a first-in-human clinical trial with ABBV‑151, triggering a $30 million milestone payment by AbbVie to us.

In May 2019, we announced the addition of two new therapeutic candidates discovered via our IAP, ARGX‑117 and ARGX‑118, to our proprietary antibody pipeline. ARGX‑117 is targeting the complement

63

Table of Contents

compound C2 with potential in severe autoimmune indications and a first-in-human clinical trial is expected in the first quarter of 2020. ARGX‑118 is addressing Galectin‑10 and targets airway inflammation.

Our product candidates are focused on indications for which there is a solid biological rationale and for which we believe there is an advantage to utilizing our suite of proprietary and licensed technologies outlined below:

- Our proprietary SIMPLE Antibody TM Platform sources antibody V-regions from the immune system of outbred llamas, each of which has a different genetic background. The V-region is responsible for targeting a specific antibody to an antigen, which is a substance that induces an immune response, and is different for every type of antibody. The llama produces highly diverse panels of antibodies with a high human homology, or similarity, in their V-regions when immunized with targets of human disease. By contrast, most antibody platforms start with antibodies generated in inbred mice or synthetic antibody library systems, approaches that we believe are limited by insufficient antibody repertoires and limited diversity, respectively. Our SIMPLE Antibody TM Platform allows us to access and explore a broad target universe, including novel and complex targets, while minimizing the long timelines associated with generating antibody candidates using traditional methods.

- Our proprietary Fc engineering technologies—NHance®, ABDEG TM and POTELLIGENT®—focus on engineering the Fc region of antibodies in order to augment their intrinsic therapeutic properties. These technologies are designed to enable us to expand the therapeutic index of our product candidates, which is the ratio between toxic and therapeutic dose, by modifying their half-life, tissue penetration, rate of disease target clearance and potency.

- Halozyme’s ENHANZE® subcutaneous drug delivery technology for which we have exclusive access for the FcRn and C2 targets and one additional target we have not yet nominated for an exclusive commercial license. Our global collaboration and license agreement with Halozyme was announced in February 2019. The ENHANZE® technology could potentially shorten drug administration time, reduce healthcare practitioner time and offer additional flexibility and convenience for patients.

Our pipeline of product candidates includes both wholly owned and partnered programs. We refer to programs for which we retain the exclusive right to develop and commercialize the product candidate on a worldwide basis as our wholly owned programs. We refer to programs for which we have entered into collaboration agreements with third parties for the development and commercialization of the product candidate as our partnered programs.

We believe that our clinical expertise and execution capabilities position us well to advance our product pipeline. We expect to commercialize certain products ourselves and expect, in certain other indications, to enter into collaborations designed to maximize the value of our portfolio. We have assembled a team of over 230 employees and consultants with experience across the spectrum of antibody drug discovery, clinical development, business development, market access and sales and marketing. Members of our board of directors, management team and key personnel have extensive experience in the life sciences industry and have previously served at companies including Alexion Pharmaceutical, Inc.; Cambridge Antibody Technology Group Plc; Celgene Corporation; Galapagos NV; Ablynx NV, GlaxoSmithKline plc; Janssen; Micromet, Inc.; Nicox S.A.; The Procter & Gamble Company; Quintiles IMS Holdings, Inc; Shire Plc (now part of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited) and Unilever N.V.

Our Strategy

Our goal is to deliver therapies that are either first-in-class or best-in-class to patients suffering from severe autoimmune and hematological diseases and various cancers for which there exists a significant unmet

64

Table of Contents

medical need. We are also focused on attaining this goal in a manner that is disciplined for a company of our size. We plan to:

- Rapidly advance efgartigimod in MG and four additional indications. We are currently developing our lead product candidate, efgartigimod, for the treatment of patients with MG, ITP, PV and CIDP and plan to start proof-of-concept clinical development in a fifth indication later in 2020. We chose these indications based on the biological rationale of targeting the neonatal Fc receptor, or FcRn, thereby reducing the pathogenic immunoglobulin G, or IgG, antibody levels that drive all of these disease states. We launched a Phase 3 clinical trial in MG for IV efgartigimod in September 2018 and completed recruitment at the end of 2019 with topline data anticipated mid‑2020, aimed at a first potential approval in MG. We launched a Phase 3 potentially registrational trial with IV efgartigimod in ITP in December 2019. An additional Phase 3 clinical trial in ITP is expected to start in the second half of 2020 evaluating IV efgartigimod for induction of platelet response, and fixed dose SC efgartigimod for maintenance of platelet response. We reported interim data for the additional Phase 2 clinical trial of efgartigimod in PV in January 2020 and initiated an additional Phase 2 clinical trial in our fourth indication CIDP. In the first half of 2019, we launched a Phase 1 clinical trial with the subcutaneous ENHANZE® formulation of efgartigimod; this trial was successfully completed by the end of 2019.

- Advance cusatuzumab in AML, MDS and adjacent hematological tumors. In December 2016, we initiated an open-label, Phase 1/2 clinical trial of cusatuzumab in combination with the standard of care, azacytidine, in newly diagnosed AML and high-risk MDS patients. We reported topline results from the dose-escalation part of this clinical trial in December 2018, and we announced the transition into the Phase 2 part of this clinical trial in August 2018. In December 2018, we and our partner Cilag (Janssen) agreed to a joint global clinical development plan to evaluate cusatuzumab in AML, MDS and other potential future indications. In 2019, we initiated a dose-confirming Phase 2 trial, CULMINATE, of cusatuzumab in combination with azacytidine in newly diagnosed elderly AML patients who are unfit for intensive chemotherapy. Additionally, a Phase 1b platform study was launched to explore combinations with standard AML therapies with the first trial exploring combinations of venetoclax, cusatuzumab and azacytidine.

- Expand applications for our existing product candidates. Our goal is to maximize the commercial potential of our existing product candidates by exploring additional indications, as well as formulations that may expand the target patient populations within existing indications. For example, our development work in efgartigimod is based on its ability to reduce circulating IgG antibodies, and this has given us the ability to leverage a single Phase 1 clinical trial in healthy volunteers into one Phase 3 and three Phase 2 clinical trials in different indications (MG, ITP, PV and CIDP) where we believe this mechanism of action may have therapeutic benefit. In addition, we believe there are other autoimmune diseases that may benefit from treatment with efgartigimod. We plan to employ a similar strategy of leveraging the strong biological rationale for other product candidates into multiple indications, thereby maximizing the value of our pipeline. We also expanded the use of our product candidates in existing indications by developing new formulations, such as a subcutaneous version of efgartigimod, which was tested in a Phase 1 healthy volunteer clinical trial, that may make our product candidates accessible to larger patient populations, including patients requiring chronic therapy, potentially outside of the hospital setting.

- Focus our discovery and development efforts on novel and complex targets to generate new first-in-class and best-in-class product candidates for autoimmune diseases and hematology/cancer. Our SIMPLE Antibody™ Platform together with the IAP allow us to explore novel disease biology and pathways allows us to access and explore a broad target universe, including novel and complex targets, while minimizing the long timelines associated with generating antibody candidates using traditional methods. By exploring a broad target universe, we are able to develop a breadth of antibodies to test many different epitopes. Being able to test many different epitopes with our antibodies enables us to search for an optimized combination of safety, potency and species cross-

65

Table of Contents

reactivity. We believe our Fc engineering and drug delivery technologies will allow us to augment our antibodies for maximum therapeutic effect.

- Selectively leverage our suite of technologies to seek strategic collaborations and maximize the value of our pipeline. Our suite of technologies and productive discovery capabilities have yielded several potential product candidates for which we seek to capture value, while maintaining our focus and discipline. We plan to collaborate on product candidates that we believe have promising utility in disease areas or patient populations that are better served by the resources of larger biopharmaceutical companies. In addition to collaborating on our product candidates, we may also elect to enter into collaborations for third-party product candidates for which we believe that our technologies and expertise may be valuable.

- Implement our "argenx 2021" vision to become a global, fully integrated, novel immunology company and independently commercialize our product candidates in indications and geographies where we believe we can extract maximum value. We plan to independently develop and commercialize those product candidates that we believe have a clear clinical and regulatory approval pathway and that we believe we can commercialize successfully ourselves, if approved. Our commercialization strategy for any product candidates that are approved will focus on key academic centers, specialist physicians and advocacy groups, as well as on providing patients with support programs and maximizing product access and reimbursement. As part of this strategy, we are building two commercial franchises in neuromuscular and hematology/oncology disorders, with the potential to expand into a third franchise in skin and kidney diseases. In 2021, we expect to launch efgartigimod in the U.S. in its first indication of generalized MG, or gMG, if approved. Through the building of commercial franchises, we plan to leverage capabilities and an organizational footprint for subsequent potential launches across our broad immunology pipeline.

Competition

We participate in a highly innovative industry characterized by a rapidly growing understanding of disease biology, quickly changing technologies, strong intellectual property barriers to entry, and a multitude of companies involved in the creation, development and commercialization of novel therapeutics. These companies are highly sophisticated and often strategically collaborate with each other.

We compete with a wide range of pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, academic institutions and other research organizations for novel therapeutic antibody targets, new technologies for optimizing antibodies, talent, financial resources, intellectual property rights and collaboration opportunities. Many of our competitors and potential competitors have substantially greater scientific, research and product development capabilities as well as greater financial, manufacturing, marketing and sales and human resources than we do. In addition, there is intense competition for establishing clinical trial sites and registering patients for clinical trials. Many specialized biotechnology firms have formed collaborations with large, established companies to support the research, development and commercialization of products that may be competitive with ours. Accordingly, our competitors may be more successful than we may be in developing, commercializing and achieving widespread market acceptance.

Competition in the autoimmune field is intense and involves multiple monoclonal antibodies, other biologics and small molecules either already marketed or in development by many different companies including large pharmaceutical companies such as AbbVie Inc. (Humira/rheumatoid arthritis); Amgen Inc. (Enbrel/rheumatoid arthritis); Biogen, Inc. (Tysabri/multiple sclerosis); GlaxoSmithKline plc, or GSK, (Benlysta/lupus); F. Hoffman-La Roche AG, or Roche, (Rituxan/often used off label); and Janssen (Remicade/rheumatoid arthritis and Stelera/psoriasis). In some cases, these competitors are also our collaborators. In addition, these and other pharmaceutical companies have monoclonal antibodies or other biologics in clinical development for the treatment of autoimmune diseases. In addition to the current standard of care, we are aware that Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is selling Soliris for the treatment of adult patients with generalized MG who are anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody positive and that GSK; Roche; Novartis AG; CSL Behring; Grifols, S.A.;

66

Table of Contents

BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc.; Curavac; Millenium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., UCB S.A./RA Pharma; Momenta Pharmaceuticals, among others, are developing drugs that may have utility for the treatment of MG. We are aware that Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Dova Pharmaceuticals.; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Shire; Immunomedics; Protalex Inc.; Principia Biopharma and others are developing drugs that may have utility for the treatment of ITP. We are aware that Roche is selling Rituxan for the treatment of moderate to severe PV and Principia; Alexion and others are developing drugs that may have utility for the treatment of PV. Furthermore, we are aware of competing products specifically targeting FcRn and being developed by UCB S.A.; Momenta, Inc.; Alexion; Immunovant and Affibody.

Competition in the leukemia and lymphoma space is intense, with many compounds in clinical trials by large multinational pharmaceutical companies and specialized biotech companies. Rituxan (Roche), Adcetris (Seattle Genetics, Inc. /Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd), Darzalex (Janssen), Poteligeo (Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.) are some examples of monoclonal antibodies approved for the treatment of Hodgkin’s lymphoma, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, multiple myeloma or other blood cancers. We are aware of AML drugs recently approved by the FDA, such as Daurismo (Pfizer), Mylotarg (Pfizer), Rydapt (Amgen), Vyxos (Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) and IDHIFA (Agios, Inc. and Celgene). In addition, we are aware of a number of other companies with development stage programs that may compete with cusatuzumab in the future if it is approved. We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new treatments enter the market and advanced technologies become available.

There are several monoclonal antibody drug discovery companies that may compete with us in the search for novel therapeutic antibody targets, including Adimab LLC; Merus N.V.; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Xencor Inc. and MorphoSys AG. We are aware that a product candidate in development by Scholar Rock, Inc. may compete with ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) and a product candidate in development by Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. may compete with ARGX‑116, if they are approved.

Our Competitive Strengths

We believe that the combination of our technologies, expertise and disciplined focus will enable us to overcome many of the challenges associated with antibody drug development and positions us to be a leader in delivering therapies to patients suffering from severe autoimmune, and hematological/oncological diseases for which the current treatment paradigm is inadequate. Our competitive strengths include:

Efgartigimod: Phase 3 product candidate with clinical proof-of-concept in MG, ITP and PV; pipeline-in-a-product opportunity in Phase 3 in two indications and Phase 2 clinical trials in two additional indications. We launched a Phase 3 clinical trial in MG for our lead product candidate, efgartigimod, in September 2018. We announced full data from the Phase 2 clinical trial in ITP in December 2018, and launched a Phase 3 clinical trial, ADVANCE, in this indication at the end of 2019. Also, at the end of 2019, we initiated a Phase 2 clinical trial, ADHERE, of SC ENHANZE® efgartigimod in CIDP, and we reported interim data of the Phase 2 clinical trial of efgartigimod in PV in January 2020. MG, ITP, PV and CIDP are rare, severe autoimmune diseases with high unmet medical need. Each indication is characterized by high levels of pathogenic IgG antibodies, and we specifically designed efgartigimod to reduce IgG antibody levels. In a Phase 1 clinical trial of efgartigimod with healthy volunteers, we observed a reduction of circulating IgG antibody levels of 50% to 85%. We believe that a reduction of pathogenic IgG antibody levels, which are a subset of circulating IgG antibodies in people with autoimmune disease, of at least 30% would be clinically meaningful. In addition, all patients in the treatment arm of our Phase 2 clinical trial in MG showed a rapid and deep reduction of their total IgG levels and disease improvement was found to correlate with reduction in pathogenic IgG levels. The treated ITP patients in the Phase 2 clinical trial showed a correlation between IgG reduction, platelet counts increase and reduction of bleeding events. In addition, interim data from the treated PV patients showed a rapid disease control in 18 out of 23 patients and fast clinical remission was observed in 5 out of 7 patients receiving the optimized dosing regimen. Based on these data, we believe efgartigimod is a pipeline-in-a-product opportunity in these, and potentially other, indications.

67

Table of Contents

- Productive discovery capabilities through our IAP that fuel a deep pipeline of clinical and preclinical product candidates. We are advancing a deep pipeline of both clinical- and preclinical-stage product candidates for the treatment of severe autoimmune diseases, hematological disorders and cancer. Leveraging our technology suite and clinical expertise, we have advanced six product candidates into clinical development —efgartigimod, cusatuzumab, ARGX‑111, ARGX‑109, ARGX‑112 and ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151); three into the preclinical stage — ARGX‑116, ARGX‑117 and ARGX‑118; and we currently have multiple programs in the discovery stage. We believe this level of productivity affords us a breadth of options with regard to independently advancing or partnering our pipeline assets.

- The ability to exploit novel and complex targets for maximum therapeutic effect. Our SIMPLE Antibody TM Platform, which is based on outbred llamas, combined with our IAP allow us to explore novel disease biology, and access and explore a broad target universe. We believe the benefit of our platform is that it provides a broader set of human-like V-regions as compared to other sources such as mice or synthetic antibody libraries. With this breadth of antibodies, we are able to test many different epitopes, which are binding sites on antigens capable of eliciting an immune response. Being able to test many different epitopes with our antibodies enables us to search for an optimized combination of safety, potency and species cross-reactivity with the potential for maximum therapeutic effect on disease.

- The ability to use our proprietary Fc engineering technologies to modulate immune response. We employ technologies—NHance®, ABDEG TM and POTELLIGENT®—that focus on engineering the Fc region of antibodies in order to augment their intrinsic therapeutic properties. These technologies are designed to expand the therapeutic index of our product candidates by modifying their half-life, tissue penetration, rate of disease target clearance and potency.

- Validating strategic collaborations to maximize pipeline value or access complementary technology. Our productive discovery capabilities and deep pipeline have provided us with multiple product candidates for which we seek to capture the greatest value. We have partnered, and expect to continue to partner, product candidates that we believe have promising utility in disease areas or patient populations that are better served by the resources of larger biopharmaceutical companies. As a result, we have entered into collaborations with a number of biopharmaceutical companies, including our collaboration with Janssen for cusatuzumab, our product candidate targeting CD70 for rare and aggressive hematological cancers and with AbbVie for ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151), a cancer immunotherapy-focused product candidate against the novel target GARP. In addition, we seek partnerships with companies that have complementary technologies. For instance, under the global collaboration and license agreement we have with Halozyme for their ENHANCE® subcutaneous drug delivery technology we have access for up to three targets, including exclusive rights to develop therapeutic products targeting human neonatal Fc receptor FcRn. Under the terms of agreement, we paid an upfront payment of $30 million to Halozyme with potential future payments up to $160 million per selected target subject to achievement of specified development, regulatory and sales-based milestones.

Our Suite of Technologies

Harnessing the Therapeutic Potential of Antibodies

Antibodies are Y-shaped proteins used by the immune system to target and clear foreign bodies, including pathogens, such as bacteria and viruses, and tumor cells. Antibodies are composed of two structurally independent parts, the variable region, or V-region, and the constant, or Fc, region. The V-region is responsible for targeting a specific antibody to an antigen and is different for every type of antibody. The Fc region does not interact with antigens, but rather interacts with components of the immune system through a variety of receptors on immune and other cells. These interactions allow antibodies to regulate the immune response and levels of cell-killing ability, or

68

Table of Contents

cytotoxicity, as well as their persistence in circulation and tissues. Fc regions are the same and interchangeable from antibody to antibody.

As shown in Figure 1, we apply a unique suite of technologies to create antibodies with optimized V-regions and an enhanced Fc region. Used alone or in combination, we believe that our suite of technologies enables us to create product candidates with potential first-in-class and best-in-class therapeutic activity against a wide range of targets.

Figure 1: Overview of our suite of technologies

Our Proprietary SIMPLE Antibody TM Platform

Our proprietary SIMPLE Antibody TM Platform sources V-regions from conventional antibodies existing in the immune system of outbred llamas. Outbred llamas are those that have been bred from genetically diverse parents, and each has a different genetic background. The llama produces highly diverse panels of antibodies with a high human homology in their V-regions when immunized with human disease targets. We then combine these llama V-regions with Fc regions of fully human antibodies, resulting in antibodies that we then produce in industry-validated production cell lines. The resulting antibodies are diverse and, due to their similarity to human antibodies, we believe they are well suited to human therapeutic use. With this breadth of antibodies, we are able to test many different epitopes. Being able to test many different epitopes with our antibodies enables us to search for an optimized combination of safety, potency and species cross-reactivity with the potential for maximum therapeutic effect on disease. These antibodies are often cross-reactive with the rodent version of chosen disease targets. This rodent cross-reactivity enables more efficient preclinical development of our product candidates because most animal efficacy models are rodent-based. By contrast, most other antibody discovery platforms start with antibodies generated in inbred mice or synthetic antibody libraries, approaches that we believe are limited by insufficient antibody repertoires and limited diversity, respectively. Our SIMPLE Antibody TM Platform allows us to access and explore a broad target universe, including novel and complex targets, while minimizing the long timelines associated with generating antibody candidates using traditional methods.

Our Proprietary Fc Engineering Technologies

Our antibody engineering technologies—NHance®, ABDEG TM and POTELLIGENT®—focus on engineering the Fc region of antibodies in order to augment their interactions with components of the immune system, thereby potentially expanding the therapeutic index of our product candidates by modifying their half-life, tissue penetration, rate of disease target clearance and potency. For example, our NHance® and ABDEG TM engineering technologies enable us to modulate the interaction of the Fc region with FcRn, which is responsible for regulating half-life, tissue distribution and pharmacodynamic properties of IgG antibodies. Similarly, our

69

Table of Contents

POTELLIGENT® engineering technology modulates the interaction of the antibody Fc region with receptors located on specialized immune cells known as natural killer, or NK, cells. These NK cells can destroy the target cell, resulting in enhanced antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity, or ADCC.

NHance® and ABDEG TM: Modulation of Fc Interaction with FcRn

An illustration of the FcRn-mediated antibody recycling mechanism is shown in Figure 2. Serum proteins, including IgG antibodies, are routinely removed from the circulation by cell uptake. Antibodies can bind to FcRn, which serves as a dedicated recycling receptor in the endosomes, which have an acidic environment, and then return to the circulation by binding with their Fc region to FcRn. Unbound antibodies end up in the lysosomes and are degraded by enzymes. Because this Fc/FcRn interaction is highly pH-dependent, antibodies tightly bind to FcRn at acidic pH (pH 6.0) in the endosomes but release again at neutral pH (pH 7. 4) in the circulation.

Figure 2: The FcRn-mediated recycling mechanism

NHance®

NHance® refers to two mutations that we introduce into the Fc region of an IgG antibody. NHance® is designed to extend antibody serum half-life and increase tissue penetration. In certain cases, it is advantageous to engineer antibodies that remain in the circulation longer, allowing them to potentially exert a greater therapeutic

70

Table of Contents

effect or be dosed less frequently. As shown in Figure 3, NHance® antibodies bind to FcRn with higher affinity, specifically under acidic pH conditions. Due to these tighter bonds, NHance® FcRn-mediated antibody recycling is strongly favored over lysosomal degradation, although some degradation does occur. NHance® allows a greater proportion of antibodies to return to the circulation potentially resulting in increased bioavailability and reduced dosing frequency. ARGX‑111, ARGX‑109, ARGX‑117 and a number of our discovery-stage programs utilize NHance®.

Figure 3: NHance® mutations favor the FcRn-mediated recycling of IgG antibodies

ABDEG TM

ABDEG TM refers to five mutations that we introduce in the Fc region that increase its affinity for FcRn at both neutral and acidic pH. In contrast to NHance®, ABDEG TM -modified Fc regions remain bound to FcRn if the pH changes, occupying FcRn with such high affinity that they deprive endogenous IgG antibodies of their recycling mechanism, leading to enhanced clearance of such antibodies by the lysosomes. Some diseases mediated by IgG antibodies are directed against self-antigens. These self-directed antibodies are referred to as autoantibodies. We use our ABDEG TM technology to reduce the level of these pathogenic autoantibodies in the circulation by increasing the rate at which they are cleared by the lysosomes. ABDEG TM is a component in a number of our product candidates, including efgartigimod.

As shown in Figure 4, our ABDEG TM technology can also be used with our pH-dependent SIMPLE Antibodies in a mechanism referred to as sweeping. Certain SIMPLE Antibodies bind to their target in a pH-dependent manner. These antibodies bind tightly to a target at neutral pH while in circulation, and release

71

Table of Contents

the target at acidic pH in the endosome. The unbound target is degraded in the lysosome. However, when equipped with our ABDEG TM technology, the therapeutic antibodies remain tightly bound to FcRn at all pH levels and are not degraded themselves. Instead, they are returned to the circulation where they can bind new targets. We believe this is especially useful in situations where high levels of the target are circulating or where the target needs to be cleared very quickly from the system.

Figure 4: SIMPLE Antibody TM and ABDEG TM technologies work in concert to sweep disease targets

POTELLIGENT®: Modulation of Fc Interaction with NK Cells

POTELLIGENT® modulates the interaction of the Fc region with the Fc gamma receptor IIIa located on specialized immune cells, known as NK cells. These NK cells can destroy the target cell, resulting in enhanced ADCC. POTELLIGENT® changes the Fc structure by excluding a particular sugar unit such that it enables a tighter fit with the Fc gamma receptor IIIa. The strength of this interaction is a key factor in determining the killing potential of NK cells. An independent publication reported that the exclusion of this sugar unit of the Fc region increases the ADCC-mediated cell-killing potential of antibodies by 10‑ to 1000‑fold. Cusatuzumab and ARGX‑111 utilize POTELLIGENT®.

72

Table of Contents

Our Wholly-Owned Programs

The following is the pipeline of our wholly owned product candidates and discovery programs

Efgartigimod (formerly referred to as ARGX‑113)

We are developing our lead product candidate, efgartigimod, for the treatment of patients with MG (Phase 3; recruitment completed), ITP (Phase 3) and PV (Phase 2; Phase 3 being prepared), all of which are rare and severe autoimmune diseases associated with high levels of circulating pathogenic IgG antibodies for which there are few innovative biologic treatments and a severe unmet medical need exists. We also initiated a Phase 2 clinical trial in a fourth indication, CIDP, with SC ENHANZE® efgartigimod and expect to start clinical development in a fifth indication in 2020.

Efgartigimod utilizes our ABDEG TM engineering technology and is designed to block the recycling of IgG antibodies, which results in their removal from circulation. We believe that our approach presents potential benefits relative to the current standard of care for MG, ITP and PV: corticosteroids and immunosuppressants in the early stages, followed by intravenous IgG, or IVIg, and plasma exchange, or plasmapheresis, as the disease progresses. The current standard of care for CIDP is IVIg. We believe efgartigimod’s potential benefits include improved time of onset, increased magnitude and duration of therapeutic benefit, a more favorable safety and tolerability profile and a reduced cost burden to the healthcare system. Data reported to-date have shown that efgartigimod is well-tolerated, with reductions in pathogenic autoantibodies correlating with improvements in clinical scores.

Efgartigimod in MG

We announced full data from a double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2 clinical trial of efgartigimod in 24 patients with gMG in April 2018. In May 2019, we announced the publication of these Phase 2 results in the peer-reviewed journal, Neurology. The Phase 3 ADAPT trial was launched in September 2018 evaluating IV efgartigimod in gMG and data are expected in mid‑2020; if successful, we anticipate submitting a Biologics License Application, or BLA, for efgartigimod in gMG in the fourth quarter of 2020. Also, in 2020 we plan to engage with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on a potential bridging strategy for 1,000 mg subcutaneous SC ENHANZE® efgartigimod in gMG.

73

Table of Contents

Efgartigimod in ITP

In 2018, we performed a second Phase 2 clinical trial of IV efgartigimod in 38 patients with ITP for which the full study data were published in the peer-reviewed journal Hematology in December 2019. The Phase 3 program of IV efgartigimod, ADVANCE, was initiated in the fourth quarter of 2019 and will evaluate the potential of IV efgartigimod for both induction and maintenance of platelet response. The ADVANCE IV+SC Phase 3 trial in ITP is expected to start in the second half of 2020 and will evaluate IV efgartigimod for induction of platelet response and a fixed dose of SC efgartigimod for maintenance. An additional small confirmatory IV trial as part of our ITP program is expected to start in the first half of 2020.

Efgartigimod in PV

A Phase 2 proof-of-concept trial of IV efgartigimod is ongoing in PV and positive interim data were presented in the beginning of 2020 with the full data set expected to be reported during a medical conference during 2020. Based on the positive interim data, we are preparing a potentially registrational Phase 3 trial which is expected to start in the second half of 2020.

Efgartigimod in CIDP

At the end of 2019, we initiated the Phase 2 ADHERE trial of SC ENHANZE® efgartigimod in patients with CIDP.

Formulation Options for Efgartigimod

We are developing three formulations of efgartigimod to address the needs of patients, physicians and payors across indications and geographies, including IV efgartigimod and two SC formulations (the standalone ENHANCE® SC formulation and the SC formulation that is dosed as maintenance after IV induction).

Overview of Myasthenia Gravis

MG is an autoimmune disorder associated with muscle weakness that is triggered by IgG autoantibodies. These antibodies attack critical signaling proteins at the junction between nerve and muscle cells, thereby impairing their communication signals. As shown in Figure 5, in MG these autoantibodies either bind and occupy or cross-link and internalize the receptor on the muscle cells, thereby preventing the binding of acetylcholine, the

74

Table of Contents

signal sent by the nerve cell. In addition, these autoantibodies can cause destruction of the neuromuscular junction by recruiting complement, a potent cell-destroying mechanism of the human immune system.

Figure 5: MG is caused by autoantibodies attacking the transmission of nerve impulses to muscles

The muscle weakness associated with MG usually presents initially in ocular muscles and can then spread into a generalized form affecting multiple muscles. MG initially causes droopy eyelids and blurred or double vision due to partial paralysis of eye movements. As MG becomes generalized it affects muscles in the neck and jaw, causing problems in speaking, chewing and swallowing. MG can also cause weakness in skeletal muscles leading to problems in limb function. In the most severe cases, respiratory function can be weakened to the point where it becomes life-threatening. These respiratory crises occur at least once in the lives of approximately 15% to 20% of MG patients.

The U.S. prevalence of MG is estimated at approximately 20 cases per 100,000. Currently, there are an estimated 64,000 MG patients in the United States, of which an estimated 55,000 patients are suffering from generalized MG. We believe that the prevalence in Europe is at a similar level. Our initial focus is on generalized MG patients whose disease is not well-controlled with corticosteroids and immunosuppressants, which we believe represents a majority of generalized MG patients.

Limitations of Current MG Treatments

Early in their disease, patients are treated with cholinesterase inhibitors, such as pyridostigmine, followed by corticosteroids and immunosuppressants. The majority of patients with MG require some form of immunotherapy at some point during their illness. Corticosteroids are associated with a number of significant side effects, including bone thinning, weight gain, diabetes, hypertension, osteoporosis and depression. The side effects of immunosuppressants, depending on the particular immunosuppressant, include weakness, sweating, transaminase elevations, neutropenia, including severe neutropenia with infection, acute deep venous thrombosis, nausea, vomiting and the incidence of cancer. As MG becomes more advanced, patients can be treated with IVIg and plasmapheresis. Both of these approaches are associated with significant side effects.

Treatment with IVIg is based on the principle of altering the balance between synthesis and degradation of antibodies in the body. IVIg treatment results in a large increase in the quantity of IgG antibodies in circulation. This excess of exogenously added IgG antibodies competes with the endogenous autoimmune antibodies for various pathways including the FcRn antibody recycling pathway. Saturation of this pathway with exogenous IgG antibodies promotes antibody destruction, which in turn leads to a decrease in the level of autoimmune antibodies.

75

Table of Contents

IVIg treatment is associated with a number of adverse events including fever, myalgia, headache, nausea and impaired kidney function or kidney disease, and IVIg can lead to life-threatening complications such as pulmonary edema, acute kidney dysfunction or stroke in elderly patients.

Plasmapheresis involves collecting blood from a patient and physically removing the IgG antibodies and other serum proteins from the plasma before returning it to the patient. Plasmapheresis is also associated with known limitations and drawbacks. Potential complications include thrombotic events, bleeding, catheter occlusion, infection, nausea, hypotension and arrhythmias. In most cases, these symptoms are mild and transient, but in some cases, they can be severe and life-threatening.

Both of these approaches place a heavy cost burden on the healthcare system. In addition to the costs of the IVIg or plasmapheresis treatment itself, hospitalization of patients receiving these treatments further adds to this cost burden. According to a 2011 study, the average short-term cost for utilizing IVIg or plasmapheresis for MG crisis was $78,814 and $101,140 per patient, respectively. In addition to patients experiencing an MG crisis, we believe a substantial number of MG patients receive chronic IVIg or plasmapheresis for which they require frequent hospitalization.

In October 2017, the FDA and European Medicines Agency approved the use of Soliris® for the treatment of generalized MG patients who have autoantibodies directed against the acetylcholine receptor. Soliris is an anti-C5 antibody blocking the activity of complement recruited by the pathogenic IgGs directed against the acetylcholine receptor at the neuromuscular junction. However, Soliris does not address the blocking of the acetylcholine receptor by pathogenic IgGs, nor the receptor cross-linking and internalization by these IgGs. In addition, a sub-set of MG patients is known to have anti-MuSK antibodies, which are known not to activate the complement cascade. The price of Soliris in MG amounts to approximately $700,000 per patient per year, placing, we believe, a substantial cost burden on the health care system.

Finally, a minority of MG patients undergo thymectomy, the surgical removal of the thymus, an immune organ which is believed to play a role in the pathogenesis of the disease.

For MG patients who have advanced to the point where they are not well-controlled with corticosteroids and immunosuppressants, we believe efgartigimod may offer advantages over IVIg and plasmapheresis, including the potential to deliver a faster onset of action, a larger and longer lasting therapeutic effect and an improved safety and tolerability profile. In addition, a subcutaneous formulation of efgartigimod could further expand its use in patients requiring chronic therapy, potentially outside of the hospital setting.

Overview of Primary Immune Thrombocytopenia

ITP is a bleeding disease caused by an autoimmune reaction in which a patient develops antibodies that attack and destroy their own platelets, which are blood cells that help blood to clot, or their own platelet-forming cells. ITP, which develops for no known reason, is differentiated from secondary immune thrombocytopenia, which is associated with other illnesses, such as infections or autoimmune diseases, or which occurs after transfusion or taking other drugs, such as cancer drugs. Platelet deficiency, or thrombocytopenia, can cause bleeding in tissues, bruising and slow blood clotting after injury. ITP affects approximately 72,000 patients in the United States.

Limitations of Current ITP Treatments

Treatment for ITP is focused on either reducing the autoimmune activity that is causing accelerated platelet destruction and allowing the platelets to recover on their own, or directly stimulating platelet production with specific growth factors. Patients with less severe ITP are treated with corticosteroids and immunosuppressants, which are associated with significant side effects also seen with such treatment of other autoimmune diseases, such as MG. For more severe ITP, splenectomy is sometimes used as treatment, although its use is rapidly declining. The use of thrombopoietin receptor agonists, which stimulate the production and

76

Table of Contents

differentiation of platelets and are approved for last-line therapy, is increasing. Patients diagnosed with severe ITP are primarily offered IVIg or, to a lesser extent, plasmapheresis.

IVIg can raise the platelet count within days in most patients, but the effect is usually transient. IVIg introduces high levels of exogenously added IgG antibodies to the blood stream that compete with the patient’s autoantibodies for various pathways including the FcRn-dependent antibody recycling pathway, thereby lowering the impact of the autoantibodies. IVIg treatment for ITP requires intravenous dosing of up to 2 g/kg per day of IVIg and is associated with many of the adverse events seen with IVIg treatment of other autoimmune diseases, such as MG as described above. Both IVIg and plasmapheresis when used to treat ITP carry a high cost burden on the healthcare system as they do when used to treat MG.

The production of platelets in patients refractory to other treatments can be stimulated by drugs such as romiplostim (Nplate) or eltrombopag (Promacta) that mimic thrombopoietin. While these therapies lead to increases in blood platelet counts, they do not address the underlying cause of the disease, which is the destruction of platelets by the immune system. Romiplostim (Nplate), Eltrombopag (Promacta) and Fostamatinib (Rigel) are approved as last-line therapy for ITP and have generated global revenues of $584 million and $635 million in 2016, respectively.

Overview of Pemphigus Vulgaris

PV is an autoimmune disorder associated with mucosal and skin blisters that lead to pain, difficulty swallowing and skin infection. This chronic, potentially life-threatening disease is triggered by IgG autoantibodies targeting desmoglein‑1 and -3, which are present on the surface of keratinocytes and important for cell-to-cell adhesion in the epithelium. Autoantibodies targeting desmogleins result in loss of cell adhesion, the primary cause of blister formation in PV. Similar to MG and ITP, disease severity of PV correlates to the amount of pathogenic IgGs targeting desmogleins.

Currently, there are an estimated 17,400 pemphigus patients in the United States, of which an estimated 13,100 patients are suffering from PV. We believe that the prevalence in Europe is at a similar level. Our initial focus is on mild-to-moderate PV patients who are either newly diagnosed or not well-controlled with corticosteroids and immunosuppressants.

Several disease activity measurements exist for the clinical evaluation of PV patients, including the pemphigus disease area index, or PDAI; autoimmune bullous skin disorder intensity score, or ABSIS; and the PV activity score, or PVAS. The PDAI is reported to have the highest validity and is recommended for use in clinical trials of PV.

Limitations of Current PV Treatments

The goals for the treatment of PV are twofold: (1) decrease blister formation and promote healing of blisters and erosions, and (2) determine the minimal dose of medication necessary to control the disease process. The current treatment regime for PV patients is limited. Typically, corticosteroids are used as first-line therapy, possibly in combination with immunosuppressants. Patients not well-controlled by these therapies may then receive IVIg or Rituxan. The latter is becoming more common in the treatment regime due to the significant side effects associated with corticosteroids and immunosuppressants. Rituxan was recently approved by the FDA for the treatment of moderate to severe PV. Rituxan carries infusion reaction risks, including anaphylaxis, and the risk of opportunistic infections, including progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, a rare and usually fatal viral disease.

Even with aggressive PV therapy, it takes two to three weeks for blisters to stop forming and about six to eight weeks for blisters to heal. Even with IVIg and Rituxan, complete remissions may take several months, and some patients do not respond to these treatments. The serious complications that can arise from use of these drug classes leave a large unmet medical need for effective therapy with a faster onset of action and better safety profile.

77

Table of Contents

Overview of Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy

CIDP is a chronic autoimmune disorder of peripheral nerves and nerve roots caused by an autoimmune-mediated destruction of the myelin sheath, or myelin producing cells, insulating the axon of the nerves and enabling speed of signal transduction. The cause of CIDP is unknown, but abnormalities in both cellular and humoral immunity have been shown. CIDP is a chronic and progressive disease: onset and progression occur over at least eight weeks in contrast with the more acute Guillain-Barré-syndrome. Demyelination and axonal damage in CIDP lead to loss of sensory and/or motor neuron function, which can lead to weakness, sensory loss, imbalance and/or pain. CIDP affects approximately 16,000 patients in the United States.

Limitations of Current CIDP Treatments

Most CIDP patients require treatment and intravenous immunoglobulin, or IVIg, which is the preferred first-line therapy. Glucocorticoids and plasma exchange are used to a lesser extent as they are either limited by side effects upon chronic use, in the case of glucocorticoids, or invasiveness of the procedure and access, which is restricted to specialized centers in case of plasma exchange. Alternative immunosuppressant agents are typically reserved for patients ineligible for or refractory to IVIg, glucocorticoids or plasma exchange. While IVIg therapy can usually control CIDP, most patients require repeated treatments every two to six weeks for many years. This is due to the fact that IVIg monotherapy does not usually lead to long-term remission. IVIg introduces high levels of exogenously added IgG antibodies to the blood stream that compete with the patient’s autoantibodies for various pathways, including the FcRn-dependent antibody recycling pathway, thereby lowering the impact of the autoantibodies. IVIg treatment for CIDP requires intravenous dosing of up to 2 g/kg per day of IVIg and is associated with many of the adverse events seen with IVIg treatment of other autoimmune diseases, such as MG. Both IVIg and plasmapheresis, when used to treat CIDP, carry a high cost burden on the healthcare system as they do when used to treat myasthenia gravis, or MG, or ITP. CIDP is the largest indication for IV/SC Ig in the United States.

Our Solution: efgartigimod

Our lead product candidate, efgartigimod, is an antibody Fc fragment that we believe has the potential to overcome many of the limitations of the current standard of care for MG, ITP, PV and CIDP, including with respect to time of onset, magnitude and duration of therapeutic benefit and safety profile. We developed efgartigimod using our ABDEG TM Fc engineering technology.

Efgartigimod targets FcRn with high affinity, thereby reducing levels of all four classes of IgG antibodies, which are referred to as IgG1, IgG2, IgG3 and IgG4. In the case of MG, the large majority of patients have autoantibodies of the IgG1 and IgG3 classes, while in the case of ITP these autoantibodies consist mainly of the IgG1 class. In the case of PV, the pathogenic autoantibodies consist mainly of the IgG1 and IgG4 class. As shown in Figure 6, efgartigimod’s mechanism of action is to block the recycling of IgG antibodies and remove them from circulation. Antibodies are routinely removed from circulation by being internalized into cells, where they can either become destined for degradation in the lysosomes or recycled back into circulation. IgG antibodies not bound to FcRn are degraded, while those bound to FcRn are recycled back into circulation. As a result of our ABDEG TM technology and the modifications we made to the Fc region, efgartigimod binds to FcRn with high affinity making this receptor unavailable to circulating IgG antibodies. The IgG antibodies can then no longer effectively be rescued and end up in the lysosomes where they are degraded. Compared to alternative immunosuppressive approaches, such as B-lymphocyte, or B-cell, depleting agents, efgartigimod acts in a highly selective manner by reducing IgG antibody levels, while leaving levels of antibodies of the immunoglobulin A, or

78

Table of Contents

IgA, immunoglobulin M, or IgM, and immunoglobulin D, or IgD, types as well as all components of the innate immune system intact.

Figure 6: Efgartigimod’s mechanism of action blocks the recycling of IgG antibodies and removes them from circulation

Based on our preclinical studies and early clinical trial results, we believe that efgartigimod has the potential to reduce levels of pathogenic IgG antibodies. Our clinical data suggest that efgartigimod reduces circulating IgG antibodies more rapidly than current therapies, which we believe could translate into faster therapeutic benefit if replicated with respect to pathogenic IgG antibodies. Our clinical data also suggest that the quantity of efgartigimod required to achieve and maintain suppression of circulating antibodies is lower than the levels of IVIg required for therapeutic benefit, which could translate into fewer infusions, shorter infusion time and a more favorable safety and tolerability profile.

In addition to MG, ITP, PV and CIDP, we believe there are other autoimmune diseases that may benefit from the mechanism of action of efgartigimod therapy. We intend to pursue initial approval for MG and then plan to expand to ITP and, potentially, PV and CIDP because these diseases have significant unmet medical needs. We then intend to expand our clinical development efforts for efgartigimod into additional indications also mediated by pathogenic IgG antibodies. Pathogenic auto-antibodies have been shown to be associated with other neuromuscular diseases such as Guillain-Barré, Lambert Eaton, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy; with other hematological diseases such as hemolytic anemia; and with other autoimmune blistering diseases such as bullous pemphigoid and epidermyolysis bullosa; as well as with systemic lupus erythematosus and multiple sclerosis, which affect larger numbers of patients.

Global and Broad Clinical Development Plan

We are currently evaluating efgartigimod in Phase 3 clinical trials in MG and ITP. A global, multi-center Phase 3 ADAPT clinical trial, including the ADAPT+ one-year open-label extension study, is currently ongoing. The ADAPT trial completed patient enrollment at the end of 2019 and we expect topline data from this trial by mid‑2020. For ITP, a global Phase 3 program includes two potentially registrational trials to be run concurrently.

79

Table of Contents

The first trial, ADVANCE, is launched and will evaluate 10mg/kg IV efgartigimod on top of standard of care medication. The second trial is expected to be launched in the second half of 2020 to evaluate 10mg/kg IV efgartigimod to induce IgG antibody reduction and clinical response followed by fixed dose 330mg SC efgartigimod to maintain clinical benefit.

A Phase 2 proof-of-concept clinical trial of efgartigimod for treatment of PV is ongoing and positive interim proof-of concept data were reported in early 2020. The detailed results of Phase 2 trial are expected to be presented during a medical meeting in 2020. We believe that this interim data supports advancing to a potentially registrational trial, which is expected to start in the second half of 2020.

Finally, at the end of 2019, we initiated the Phase 2 ADHERE trial of SC ENHANZE® efgartigimod in CIDP patients, and we expect to start clinical development in a fifth indication in 2020.

Phase 2 Clinical Trial in MG

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2 clinical trial to evaluate the safety and tolerability, efficacy, pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of efgartigimod. This clinical trial was conducted in 24 generalized MG patients with an MG-Activity-of-Daily-Living, or MG-ADL, score of 5 points or higher, with more than 50% of the score consisting of non-ocular items, and who are on a stable dose of cholinesterase inhibitors, steroids and/or immunosuppressants which make up the typical first- and second-line standard-of-care therapies. We conducted the clinical trial at 19 sites across Europe, Canada and the United States. Patients were randomly assigned to two arms of 12 patients each. Patients in one treatment arm received 10 mg/kg of efgartigimod, and the other treatment arm received placebo. All patients continued to receive the standard of care. Dosing took place during a three-week period which included four weekly doses of efgartigimod or placebo. Patients received follow-up for eight weeks after treatment.

The primary objectives of this Phase 2 clinical trial were to evaluate the safety and tolerability of efgartigimod with primary endpoints evaluating the incidence and severity of adverse events and serious adverse events, and evaluating vital signs, electrocardiogram and laboratory assessments. Secondary endpoints of the trial included efficacy as measured by the change from baseline of the MG-ADL; Quantitative MG; and MG Composite disease severity scores and the impact on quality of life as measured by the MG Quality of Life score. In addition, an assessment of pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and immunogenicity was performed. All 24 enrolled patients were evaluable.

Phase 2 Topline Results

We announced full data from this Phase 2 clinical trial in April 2018 and the data were published in the peer-reviewed journal, Neurology, in 2019. The primary endpoint analysis demonstrated efgartigimod to be well-tolerated in all patients, with most treatment emergent adverse events or TEAEs observed characterized as mild (CTCAE Grading 1 and 2). No TEAEs severity with CTCAE Grade 3 or higher were reported. No clinically significant laboratory, vital signs and/or electrocardiogram findings were observed. No laboratory abnormality including albumin similar to the findings cynomolgus monkeys and in clinical trials. No TEAE leading to discontinuation, no serious TEAE and no deaths were reported during the trial. The observed tolerability profile was consistent with the Phase 1 healthy volunteer trial as well as our Phase 2 clinical trial in ITP.

All TEAEs reported, as well as TEAEs deemed to be drug-related by the investigator in at least two patients, are summarized in Table 1.

80

Table of Contents

Table 1. Overview of TEAEs and drug related TEAEs reported in at least two patients in efgartigimod Phase 2 Clinical Trial in MG

TEAE/patinet count |  | Placebo (n = 12) |  | Efgartigimod (n = 12) |  | Total (n = 24) |
TEAEs (total) |  | 10 (83.3) |  | 10 (83.3) |  | 20 (83.3) |
Headache |  | 3 (25.0) |  | 4 (33.3) |  | 7 (29.2) |
Nausea |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 2 (8.3) |
Diarrhea |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 2 (8.3) |
Abdominal pain upper |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 2 (8.3) |
Arthralgia |  | 2 (16.7) |  | 0 (0.0) |  | 2 (8.3) |
Total lymphocyte count decrease |  | — |  | 2 (16.7) |  | 2 (8.3) |
B-lymphocyte decrease |  | — |  | 2 (16.7) |  | 2 (8.3) |
Monocyte count decrease |  | — |  | 2 (16.7) |  | 2 (8.3) |
Neutrophil count increase |  | — |  | 2 (16.7) |  | 2 (8.3) |
Myalgia |  | — |  | 2 (16.7) |  | 2 (8.3) |
Pruritus |  | 2 (16.7) |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 3 (12.5) |
Rhinorrhea |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 2 (8.3) |
Tooth abscess |  | 2 (16.7) |  | — |  | 2 (8.3) |
Toothache |  | 2 (16.7) |  | — |  | 2 (8.3) |

Abbreviation: TEAE = treatment-emergent adverse event.

Data are n (%).

The secondary endpoint measures relating to efficacy showed efgartigimod treatment resulted in a strong clinical improvement over placebo as measured by all four predefined clinical efficacy scales during the entire duration of the trial. Patients in the treatment arm showed rapid onset of disease improvement, with clear separation from placebo one week after the first infusion.

83% of patients treated with efgartigimod achieved a clinically meaningful response (MG-ADL>2). 75% of patients treated with efgartigimod had a clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in MG-ADL scores (at least a two-point reduction from baseline) for a period of at least six consecutive weeks versus 25% of patients on placebo (p = 0.0391).

Clinical benefit in the efgartigimod treatment group maximized as of one week after the administration of the last dose, achieving statistical significance over the placebo group (p = 0.0356) on the MG-ADL score. Increasing differentiation was observed between the efgartigimod treatment group versus placebo with increasing MG-ADL and QMG thresholds at day 29 (1 week after last dosing) as shown in Figure 7.

81

Table of Contents

Figure 7: Increasing differentiation in patient MG-ADL and QMG thresholds (treatment group vs. placebo)

* Missing data point in one patient

Analysis of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic endpoints was generally consistent with the findings from the Phase 1 clinical trial. We observed disease improvement to be correlated with reduction in pathogenic IgG levels. Total IgG reduction in patients was consistent with the Phase 1 healthy volunteer trial showing a mean maximum IgG reduction of up to 70.7% among treated patients. Reduction of IgG levels was consistent across IgG subtypes, including AChR autoantibodies (IgG1 and IgG3).

In line with findings in the Phase 1 healthy volunteer trial, positive anti-drug antibody, or ADA, titers were detected in a limited number of patients. In the Phase 2 clinical trial, positive post-dosing ADA titers were detected in four out of 12 patients receiving efgartigimod and in three out of 12 patients receiving placebo. In one active-treated patient, positive post-dose ADA titers were detected as of two weeks after the last infusion, and these titers may have the tendency to slightly increase over the course of the trial. In line with the results obtained in the Phase 1 healthy volunteer trial, the majority of ADA signals in active-treated patients were just above the detection limit of the assay and were typically only found once or twice during the course of the trial. Positive post-dose ADA titers had no apparent effect on efgartigimod pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics

Phase 2 Clinical Trial in ITP

We completed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2 clinical trial to evaluate the safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of efgartigimod in 38 adult primary ITP patients, who have platelet counts lower than 30 x 10 9/L while being on a stable dose of standard-of-care treatments consisting of corticosteroids, permitted immunosuppressants or thrombopoietin receptor agonists, or after having undergone a splenectomy or while being monitored under a ‘watch & wait’ approach. We conducted the clinical trial at 19 clinical centers across eight countries in the European Union. Patients were randomly assigned to three arms of 12 or 13 patients for the placebo or efgartigimod arms, respectively. All patients in this clinical trial on a drug standard-of-care treatment were to continue to receive their stable dose of standard-of-care treatment as per the protocol. One treatment arm received 5 mg/kg efgartigimod, the second arm received 10 mg/kg efgartigimod and the third arm received placebo. Dosing took place in a three-week period, which included four weekly doses of efgartigimod or placebo. Patient follow-up continued for 21 weeks after treatment. Patients from all three cohorts were eligible to enroll in a one-year open-label extension study at the 10mg/kg dose of efgartigimod, subject to meeting enrollment criteria, including platelet counts lower than 30 x 10 9/L.

82

Table of Contents

Phase 2 Topline Results

The primary objectives of this Phase 2 clinical trial were to evaluate safety and tolerability of efgartigimod with primary endpoints evaluating the incidence and severity of adverse events and serious adverse events, and evaluating vital signs, electrocardiogram and laboratory assessments. Secondary objectives included evaluation of efficacy, based on platelet count, use of rescue treatment and bleeding events, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and immunogenicity.

We announced full data from this Phase 2 clinical trial in December 2018 and in December 2019, we announced a peer-reviewed publication of these data in The Journal of Hematology. The primary endpoint analysis demonstrated efgartigimod to be well-tolerated in all patients, with most treatment emergent adverse events (TEAE) observed characterized as mild (CTCAE Grading 1 and 2). Two serious TEAEs were reported for 2 (15.4%) out of 13 patients both in the efgartigimod 10 mg/kg treatment group (1 case of bronchitis and 1 case of thrombocytopenia); both serious TEAE were considered not related to the trial treatment and both serious TEAEs were downgraded after the study database locked. No deaths were reported during the study. The observed tolerability profile was consistent with the Phase 1 healthy volunteer trial as well as our Phase 2 clinical trial in MG.

All non-bleeding TEAEs reported, as well as non-bleeding TEAEs deemed to be drug-related by the investigator in at least two patients, are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: Overview of TEAEs and drug related TEAEs reported in at least two patients in efgartigimod Phase 2 Clinical Trial in ITP

Main study |  | Placebo (N = 12) n (%) |  | Efgartigimod 5 mg/kg (N = 13) n (%) |  | Efgartigimod 10 mg/kg (N = 13) n (%) |
Patients with at least 1 TEAE |  | 7 (58.3) |  | 9 (69.2) |  | 11 (84.6) |
Patients with at least 1 treatment-related TEAE |  | 2 (16.7) |  | — |  | 1 (7.7) |
Patients with at least 1 serious TEAE |  | — |  | — |  | 1(7.7) |
Most common TEAEs (reported in ≥ 2 patients overall) |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Petechiae |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 2 (15.4) |  | 2 (15.4) |
Purpura |  | — |  | 2(15.4) |  | 1 (7.7) |
Ecchymosis |  | — |  | 1 (7.7) |  | 1 (7.7) |
Rash |  | — |  | 1 (7.7) |  | 1 (7.7) |
Hematoma |  | — |  | 3 (23.1) |  | 2 (15.4) |
Hypertension |  | 1 (8.3) |  | — |  | 2 (15.4) |
Vomiting |  | — |  | — |  | 2 (15.4) |
Contusion |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 1 (7.7) |  | 1 (7.7) |
Cystitis |  | — |  | 1 (7.7) |  | 1 (7.7) |
Productive cough |  | 1 (8.3) |  | 1 (7.7) |  | — |
Headache |  | 2 (16.7) |  | 1 (7.7) |  | — |
Open-label treatment period |  | Efgartigimod 10 mg/kg (N = 12) n (%) |
Patients with at least 1 TEAE |  | 7 (58.3%) |
Patients with at least 1 treatment-related TEAE |  | — |
Patients with at least 1 serious TEAE |  | 2 (16.7) |
Most common TEAEs (reported in ≥ 2 patients overall) Alanine aminotransferase increased |  | 2 (16.7) |

Abbreviations: N, number of patients in the analysis set; n, number of patients with event within each treatment group under safety analysis set; TEAE, treatment emergent adverse event.

Clinically meaningful improvements in platelet counts were seen across ITP classifications and standard of care. 46% of patients demonstrated improved platelet count to ≥ 50x10 9/L during two or more visits in each of the 5 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg dosing cohorts compared to 25% in the placebo cohort. 67% of patients in the OLE trial

83

Table of Contents

demonstrated improved platelet count to ≥ 50x10 9/L during two or more visits following the first dosing cycle. Responders from the 10 mg/kg arm in the primary trial all responded again upon retreatment in the OLE trial. Onset of platelet count reaching 50x10 9/L for the first time ranged from week 1 to week 10, consistent with disease heterogeneity. For efgartigimod-treated patients with clinically meaningful platelet responses (≥ 50x10 9/L during two or more visits), the mean duration of platelet response was 40 days versus 16 days for placebo treated patients, with responses lasting the trial duration.

38% of efgartigimod-treated patients showed durable platelet count improvements to clinically meaningful and statistically significant levels of ≥ 50x10 9/L for at least 10 cumulative days, compared to 0% of placebo patients (p=0.03). These data are summarized in figures 8 and 9.

Figure 8: Patients achieving platelet counts of ≥ 50x10 9/L at least two times.

Figure 9: Post-hoc analysis of increasing thresholds of efficacy

84

Table of Contents

Note: Increasing threshold analysis based exact logistic regression model with the baseline result as a factor

The frequency of bleeding related events, as defined in the protocol, was evaluated separately. This was done due to the nature of the disease, as low platelet levels in ITP patients may induce bleeding events in a proportion of patients, and signs and symptoms vary widely. Bleeding events were assessed using three metrics—adverse event reporting, the WHO scale and the ITP-BAT scale—and showed that efgartigimod reduced bleeding events across each scale. Adverse event reporting showed no severe bleeding events in any patient, mild bleeding events only were reported in the 10 mg/kg arm and mild and moderate in the 5 mg/kg and placebo arm. Incidence of bleeding events was reduced by efgartigimod treatment as assessed by the WHO bleeding scale, with separation from placebo as early as the third dose in the 10 mg/kg arm. Incidence of bleeding events in the skin was reduced by efgartigimod treatment as assessed by the ITP-BAT bleeding scale, with no clear signal of bleeding events in the mucosa or organs in either treatment arm. Efgartigimod treatment resulted in clear correlation between IgG reduction, platelet count improvement and bleeding event reduction.

Analysis of the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic endpoints was generally consistent with the findings from the Phase 1 clinical trial as well as the MG Phase 2 clinical trial. Lasting IgG reductions were consistent with levels achieved in previous studies. All efgartigimod-treated patients showed a rapid and deep reduction of total IgG levels, consistent with the pharmacodynamic effects observed in previous clinical trials. Reduction of IgG levels was consistent across IgG subtypes. Reduction in platelet-associated autoantibodies were observed in the majority of patients with clinically meaningful platelet increase. Low titer of anti-drug antibodies was detected in 16.7% of placebo patients and 30.8% of treated patients in the 10 mg/kg arm with no apparent effect on pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics.

Figure 10: Reduction of total IgGs correlates with increased platelet counts and reduced bleeding event

Phase 2 Clinical Trial in PV

We are conducting an open-label, non-controlled Phase 2 clinical trial to evaluate the safety, efficacy, pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of efgartigimod in a minimum of 12 patients with mild to moderate PV who are either newly diagnosed or relapsing. We conduct the clinical trial at 12 sites across Europe, Ukraine and Israel. The trial design comprises three cohorts of a minimum of four patients each. The first cohort received 10 mg/kg of efgartigimod in four weekly doses as induction therapy, followed by five weeks of maintenance therapy with efgartigimod dosed at 10 mg/kg at week 1 and week 5 of the maintenance period, followed by an eight-week follow-up period with no dosing of efgartigimod. In newly diagnosed patients and relapsing patients off-therapy, efgartigimod will be dosed as monotherapy, in absence of standard of care therapy. In relapsing patients on prednisone, efgartigimod will be dosed on top of a stable dose of prednisone during the induction phase. The prednisone dose may be changed (decreased or increased) from the beginning of the maintenance phase up to study end according to standard of care (i. e., corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, IVIg, plasma exchange and rituximab). An Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC) may recommend adapting the dose during both the induction and the maintenance period, or the dosing frequency at maintenance, or the duration of dosing during the maintenance period with a maximum of two extra doses per cohort for a following cohort based on the outcome of the previous cohort. In case of a dose increase, the maximum dose would be 25 mg/kg.

85

Table of Contents

The primary objectives of this Phase 2 clinical trial are to evaluate safety and tolerability of efgartigimod, with primary endpoints evaluating the incidence and severity of adverse events and serious adverse events and evaluating vital signs, electrocardiogram, physical examination abnormalities and laboratory assessments. Secondary objectives include evaluation of pharmacodynamics including assessment of total IgG and pathogenic IgG levels, efficacy based on the PDAI score, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity.

Phase 2 Interim Results and Next Steps

In the first cohort of the Phase 2 trial, six mild to moderate PV patients with no or low-dose corticosteroid therapy were treated with efgartigimod. Disease control was reached in three out of six patients in one week, which was characterized by patients having signs of healing of existing lesions and the absence of new lesions forming. One patient reached disease control after four weeks. Two patients had progression of disease. In all patients exhibiting disease control, a mean maximum reduction in Pemphigus Disease Area Index (PDAI) of 55% correlated with a mean maximum decrease in pathogenic autoantibodies levels of 57%. No meaningful anti-drug antibody signals were reported.

The IDMC evaluated the results of the first patient cohort and determined the tolerability profile to be favorable. The IDMC recommended maintaining the dose at 10 mg/kg but adjusted the dosing frequency and duration of the maintenance phase for the next cohort. The second patient cohort will dose every two weeks during the maintenance phase and will add two additional administrations for a period of eight total weeks of maintenance, up from six weeks in cohort 1.

The Phase 2 proof-of-concept clinical trial for treatment of PV is still ongoing but we reported additional positive proof-of-concept interim data early 2020 where 23 patients were evaluated.

The data demonstrated a clear correlation between pathogenic IgG reduction and the Pemphigus Disease Area Index score improvement as illustrated below. 78% (18/23) of patients achieved rapid disease control; median time to disease control for both monotherapy and combination therapy was 14‑15 days. A fast-clinical remission (CR) was observed in 70% (5/7) of patients receiving an optimized dosing regimen; CR was achieved within 2‑10 weeks. The optimized dosing regimen was determined to be at least biweekly dosing of efgartigimod in combination with oral prednisone (0.25‑0.5mg/kg). This data suggested the potential for corticosteroid sparing treatment. In addition, an independent data review committee concluded tolerability to be favorable.

IgG reduction correlates to PDAI score improvement in responders

86

Table of Contents

Patients still in trial are included in the extended dosing cohort and detailed results of Phase 2 trial are expected to be presented during a medical meeting in 2020. We believe that this data supports advancing to a potentially registrational trial expected to start in the second half of 2020.

Phase 1 Clinical Trial for Subcutaneous Formulation of efgartigimod (fixed maintenance dose used after IV induction)

In addition to the intravenous product formulation of efgartigimod, we are also developing a subcutaneous product formulation designed to enable administration of efgartigimod to larger patient populations, including patients requiring chronic therapy, potentially outside the hospital setting.

We evaluated the intravenous and subcutaneous formulations of efgartigimod head-to-head in a preclinical cynomolgus monkey model. The results suggest that both formulations result in comparable half-life in circulation of efgartigimod, a favorable bioavailability of 75% of the subcutaneous formulation and a comparable pharmacodynamic effect shown by reduction of total IgG antibodies.

We initiated a Phase 1 clinical trial in healthy volunteers for a subcutaneous formulation for the treatment of chronic autoimmune diseases. The open-label, Phase 1 trial enrolled 32 healthy volunteers and included three treatment arms: one each of single dose SC and IV efgartigimod, and one evaluating an IV induction followed by a SC maintenance dose. In the single dose treatment arms, the data showed the SC formulation to have comparable half-life, pharmacodynamics and tolerability to the IV formulation, and a bioavailability of approximately 50%. In addition, initial IV dosing followed by weekly 300 mg (2 ml) SC administration of efgartigimod provided sufficient exposure to maintain IgG suppression at a steady state IgG reduction of approximately 50%. The data also suggested a favorable tolerability profile and no meaningful anti-drug antibody signals were reported. The SC formulation supports key manufacturing improvements, including a high product concentration (150mg/ml), low viscosity and optimal stability.

Phase 1 Clinical Trial ENHANZE® SC efgartigimod (standalone SC formulation)

In addition to the subcutaneous product formulation of efgartigimod, we developed a standalone SC formulation of efgartigimod as part of our collaboration with Halozyme based on a co-formulation of efgartigimod with Halozyme’s proprietary ENHANZE® drug delivery technology (hyaluronidase, rHuPH20), designed to enable a smooth and convenient SC administration with larger volumes of efgartigimod with short injection times.

We initiated a Phase 1 clinical trial in healthy volunteers for the ENHANZE® subcutaneous formulation for the treatment of chronic autoimmune diseases. The open-label, Phase 1 trial enrolled 33 healthy volunteers and included four treatment arms: three with fixed doses of ENHANZE® SC efgartigimod, and one evaluating a body weight-based dose of ENHANZE® SC efgartigimod. Clear dose dependent reductions in mean total IgG and the different IgG subtypes concentration were observed. Using PK-PD modelling, we selected a dose of 1000 mg ENHANZE® SC efgartigimod to be equivalent to the 10 mg/kg IV efgartigimod formulation with respect to the effect on IgG levels.

The ENHANZE® SC efgartigimod formulation was quickly injected with mean injection times lower than 1 minute for the smallest dose.

Single dose of ENHANZE® SC efgartigimod of 750 mg, 1250 mg, 1750 mg, or 10 mg/kg was well tolerated by all healthy subjects. No obvious TEAE were reported beyond mild and transient injection site reactions, in line with reported ENHANZE®coformulation findings. No meaningful immunogenicity was reported.

First-in-Human Clinical Development Plan and Clinical Data

We have completed enrollment in a double blind, placebo-controlled Phase 1 clinical trial in healthy volunteers to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and immunogenicity of single and multiple doses of efgartigimod. In the first part of the clinical trial, 30 subjects were randomized to receive a

87

Table of Contents

single dose of efgartigimod or placebo ranging from 0.2 mg/kg to 50 mg/kg. In the second part of the clinical trial, 32 subjects were randomized to receive multiple ascending doses of efgartigimod or placebo up to a maximum of 25 mg/kg.

We announced interim data from this Phase 1 clinical trial in June 2016 and at a workshop we sponsored in conjunction with the American Society of Hematology annual meeting in December 2016. We expect that the full results from this clinical trial will be published in a peer reviewed journal during the first half of 2017.

Single Ascending Dose

We observed that a single two-hour infusion of 10 mg/kg efgartigimod was associated with an approximate 50% reduction of circulating IgG antibody levels. We observed that a reduction of circulating IgG antibody levels persisted for more than four weeks after the last dose, as shown in Figure 8. We believe this sustained reduction would be clinically meaningful if replicated with respect to pathogenic IgG antibodies because IVIg and plasmapheresis typically result in a 30% to 60% reduction in pathogenic IgG antibody levels.

Figure 8. Selective reduction of IgG by administration of efgartigimod to healthy volunteers in the single ascending dose part of our Phase 1 clinical trial

Administration of efgartigimod at single doses up to 25 mg/kg was reported to be well tolerated and administration of a single dose of 50 mg/kg was reported to be moderately tolerated. There were no drug or infusion related serious adverse events associated with doses up to 50 mg/kg. The most frequently reported drug related adverse events included abnormal white blood cell count, increased C reactive protein levels, headache, dizziness and chills. All of these adverse events were mild or moderate and reported only in the two highest dose groups (25 mg/kg and 50 mg/kg). While efgartigimod was associated with a decrease in the levels of IgG antibodies, there were no observed changes in IgM or IgA levels or serum albumin observed in the clinical trial, suggesting that efgartigimod has the potential to be a highly selective immunosuppressant.

Multiple Ascending Dose

In the multiple ascending dose part of the Phase 1 clinical trial, repeat administration of both 10 mg/kg and 25 mg/kg of efgartigimod every seven days, four doses in total, and 10 mg/kg every four days, six doses in total, was associated with a gradual reduction in levels of all four classes of IgG antibodies by 60% to 85%, with 10 mg/kg dose results shown in Figure 9. For all doses, we observed the reduction in circulating IgG antibody levels to persist for more than four weeks after the last dose with levels below 50% at approximately three weeks and did

88

Table of Contents

not return to baseline levels for more than one month. Pharmacokinetic analysis of serum baseline levels of efgartigimod indicates that it has a half-life of approximately three to four days with no drug accumulation following subsequent weekly dosing. The prolonged activity on the levels of IgG antibodies is consistent with the mechanism of action of efgartigimod and the effect of the ABDEG TM technology on increasing the intracellular recycling of efgartigimod. Similar to the single ascending dose part, no significant reductions in IgM, IgA or serum albumin were observed.

Figure 9. Reduction in the levels of four IgG antibody classes and total IgG levels in the multiple ascending dose part of our Phase 1 clinical trial of efgartigimod in healthy volunteers at a dose of 10 mg/kg every seven days

Administration of multiple efgartigimod doses of 10 mg/kg and 25 mg/kg were reported to be well tolerated. One serious adverse event, hyperventilation, was observed in the multiple ascending dose part. This event, which occurred six days after drug administration, was considered by the clinical investigator as unlikely to be related to efgartigimod. Some patients had changes to C reactive protein levels that were considered clinically significant. The most frequently reported drug related adverse events included headache, feeling cold, chills and fatigue, all of which were mild or moderate and reported only in the highest dose group of 25 mg/kg.

In a limited number of pre and post dose samples originating from both active and placebo treated individuals, positive ADA titers were detected. During the single ascending dose part of the clinical trial, three out of 20 subjects on drug and one out of 10 subjects on placebo showed positive post dose ADA titers. During the multiple ascending dose part of the clinical trial, one out of 23 subjects on drug and two out of eight subjects on placebo showed positive post dose ADA titers. Signals typically were just above the detection limit of the assay and were only found once during the clinical trial for the majority of subjects. No increase of ADA titers over time for individual subjects was observed, nor had any of the subjects with at least one positive ADA sample an apparent different pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile.

Cusatuzumab (formerly referred to as ARGX‑110)

We are developing cusatuzumab in hematological cancer indications, currently AML, as well as high‑risk MDS. We are developing cusatuzumab with our collaborator Janssen. See “Collaboration Agreements" below.

89

Table of Contents

AML is rare and aggressive hematological cancer for which significant unmet medical needs exist. MDS, a rare bone marrow disorder, is often a precursor to AML. cusatuzumab is a SIMPLE Antibody TM designed to potently block the CD70/CD27 interaction and kill CD70‑positive cells via its potent antibody effector functions through the use of POTELLIGENT® technology.

Cusatuzumab is currently being evaluated in an open label registration directed Phase 2 clinical trial, CULMINATE, in combination with azacytidine, in newly diagnosed AML patients who are unfit for intensive chemotherapy or in patients with high-risk MDS. A Phase 1b platform trial is also underway in various AML subpopulations and settings with an initial trial evaluating combinations of cusatuzumab, venetoclax and azacitadine.

We reported results for the first 12 patients from the dose-escalation part of the Phase 1/2 clinical trial in combination with azacytidine in AML or high-risk MDS in December 2019, which demonstrated a favorable tolerability profile of the combination therapy and suggested evidence of biological activity across the evaluated doses.

In addition, we reported results of the Phase 2 part of the Phase 1/2 clinical trial in relapsed or refractory CD70‑positive CTCL patients and an open-label Phase 1 clinical trial in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Overview of Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndrome

AML is a hematological cancer characterized by excessive proliferation of myeloid stem cells and their failure to properly differentiate into mature white blood cells. AML is the second most common subtype of leukemia in adults. In the United States, AML has an incidence of approximately 22,000 new cases annually. AML is generally a disease of elderly people, with more than 60% of diagnosed patients being older than 60 years, and AML is uncommon before the age of 45. The average five-year survival rate for patients with AML is 27%, but there are significant differences in prognosis depending on several factors, including the age of the patient at diagnosis. For patients under the age of 45, the five-year survival rate is approximately 57%, while for those over the age of 65 it is only 6%. There are likely multiple reasons for this discrepancy, including the ability of younger patients to tolerate more aggressive therapy.

Current first-line treatments in AML typically involve aggressive chemotherapy, including alkylating agents and cytarabine potentially followed by stem cell transplantation, for younger patients with the aim to induce remission. This therapy is not recommended for older patients or patients with comorbidities, who are often treated with hypomethylating agents. We believe there is a significant need for safer, more effective AML treatments that can also be used in elderly patients. Because relapse is often due to leukemic stem cells present next to the malignant AML cells, or blasts, therapies targeting both blasts and leukemic stem cells may be more efficacious than chemotherapy only and could increase survival rates.

MDS also affects bone marrow cells, reducing their ability to produce red and white blood cells or platelets. In the United States, MDS has an incidence of approximately 13,000 new cases annually. There are currently an estimated 60,000 MDS patients in the United States. Approximately 75% of MDS patients are older than 60 years of age when diagnosed, and, like with AML, as the population ages the disease prevalence is expected to rise. Some MDS patients are at high risk to develop AML and are treated in a similar way as AML patients.

Our Solution: cusatuzumab

We developed cusatuzumab using our SIMPLE Antibody TM Platform and the POTELLIGENT® Fc engineering technology. Cusatuzumab binds to the cell surface protein CD70 with high affinity, blocking the interaction between CD70 and its receptor CD27 and targeting CD70 expressing cells for destruction by multiple immune pathways. CD70 is a cell surface protein that is highly expressed in cancer, including in T-cell and B-cell lymphomas, leukemias and certain solid tumors. In normal tissues, CD70 expression is either low or absent. Binding of CD70 to its receptor, CD27, initiates a cascade of intracellular events leading to cell proliferation and

90

Table of Contents

survival. As a byproduct of CD70 binding to CD27, the extracellular portion of CD27 is cleaved, creating a soluble form of CD27 known as sCD27, which can easily be measured. sCD27 may serve as a biomarker for CD70 activity, potentially allowing us to identify target patients based on the likelihood of response to treatment, monitor disease progression and measure the impact of anti-CD70 therapy. In AML, CD70 is also expressed on leukemic stem cells. Leukemic stem cells are demonstrated to give rise to a large population of more mature leukemic blasts which lack self-renewal capacity in AML. Leukemic stem cells reside in the bone marrow and are considered difficult to target specifically. Preliminary data from the first set of patients in our clinical trial suggest cusatuzumab could be active both at the circulating and bone marrow blast level and at the leukemic stem cell level. Cusatuzumab exhibits potent ADCC and antibody dependent cellular phagocytosis potential through the use of POTELLIGENT® technology as well as complement-dependent cytotoxicity leading to the killing of cells expressing CD70.

Clinical Development Plan

In December 2016, we initiated an open-label Phase 1/2 clinical trial of cusatuzumab at three sites in Switzerland for the treatment of newly diagnosed AML or high-risk MDS patients. We reported interim results from the dose-escalation part of this clinical trial in December 2019.

The registration directed Phase 2 CULMINATE clinical trial is currently enrolling up to 150 patients with previously untreated AML who are not eligible for intensive chemotherapy. In this two-part trial, patients will first be randomized to receive one of two dose levels of cusatuzumab (10mg/kg and 20mg/kg) in combination with azacytidine (75mg/m2) followed by an expansion cohort to evaluate efficacy of the selected dose of cusatuzumab. A Phase 1b platform trial is also underway in various AML subpopulations and settings with the initial trial evaluating combinations of cusatuzumab, venetoclax and azacitadine; additional trials are expected to launch under this platform trial in the first half of 2020. A randomized Phase 2 trial in higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) is expected to start in the first half of 2020. A data update of the cusatuzumab development program is expected in 2020.

In addition, cusatuzumab was evaluated in an open-label Phase 1/2 clinical trial in relapsed or refractory CD70‑positive CTCL patients and an open-label Phase 1 clinical trial in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Prior to this, cusatuzumab was evaluated in an extensive Phase 1 clinical trial in patients with advanced malignancies expressing CD70, following a stepwise adaptive clinical trial design enrolling a total of 86 patients (of whom 85 patients have been treated).

Phase 1/2 Clinical Trial in Combination with Azacytidine in Patients with AML or High-Risk MDS (ongoing)

We are evaluating cusatuzumab in an open-label, dose-escalating Phase 1/2 clinical trial to evaluate its safety, tolerability and efficacy in combination with azacitidine in newly diagnosed AML patients unfit for chemotherapy or high-risk MDS patients. The clinical trial was initiated in December 2016. All patients in this clinical trial are receiving cusatuzumab in combination with 75 mg/m 2 azacitidine (standard of care for AML). Patients receive two weeks of cusatuzumab monotherapy prior to starting the combination dosing. During the Phase 1 dose-escalation part of the clinical trial, four doses of cusatuzumab, 1 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg,10 mg/kg and 20 mg/kg administered bi-weekly are being evaluated. We enrolled 12 patients in the Phase 1 part.

26 AML patients were enrolled in the Phase 2 part of its Phase 1/2 clinical trial using a 10 mg/kg dose of cusatuzumab. This is a multi-center clinical trial conducted in Europe.

We reported updated interim results for the 12 evaluable patients from the Phase 1 dose-escalation part of this clinical trial in December 2019 at the ASH annual meeting, representing the data as of February 2019. Six out of twelve Phase 1 patients were still on treatment at the time of the interim data. These interim results showed for the first 12 patients that no dose-limiting toxicity was observed for cusatuzumab and that cusatuzumab was overall reported to be well-tolerated with signs of clinical activity. To date, the tolerability profile of cusatuzumab in this Phase 1/2 clinical study in combination with azacitidine appears to be similar to what we observed in the other

91

Table of Contents

cusatuzumab clinical trials. We believe that the observed Grade 3 and 4 hematological toxicity for cusatuzumab in combination with azacitidine corresponds to the reported safety profile of azacitidine monotherapy and can be seen in Table 2 below. No grade 5 TEAEs were observed.

Table 2. Grade 3 or higher treatment emergent adverse events of cusatuzumab in combination with azacitidine open-label, Phase 1 dose-escalation part (first 12 evaluable patients, ongoing, as of February 2019.

Escalation phase – cusatuzumab dose: |  | 1 mg/kg (N=3) |  | 3 mg/kg (N=3) |  | 10 mg/kg (N=3) |  | 20 mg/kg (N=3) |  | Total (N=12) |
TEAEs grade 3 and 4* |  | Number of patients |
Blood and lymphatic disorders |  | 2 |  | 3 |  | 2 |  | 3 |  | 10 |
Anemia |  | 1 |  | 3 |  | 1 |  | — |  | 5 |
Febrile neutropenia |  | 2 |  | — |  | 1 |  | 2 |  | 5 |
Leukopenia |  | — |  | — |  | 1 |  | — |  | 1 |
Neutropenia |  | — |  | — |  | 1 |  | 2 |  | 3 |
Thrombocytopenia |  | — |  | — |  | 1 |  | — |  | 1 |
Cardiac disorders |  | 1 |  | — |  | — |  | 1 |  | 2 |
GI disorders |  | — |  | 1 |  | — |  | 1 |  | 2 |
General disorders and administration site conditions |  | — |  | 1 |  | 1 |  | — |  | 2 |
Infections and infestations |  | 1 |  | 2 |  | — |  | 3 |  | 6 |
Laboratry abnormalities |  | 3 |  | 3 |  | — |  | 1 |  | 7 |
Reproductive system and breast disorders |  | — |  | — |  |  |  | 1 |  | 1 |
Vascular disorders |  | — |  | 1 |  | — |  | — |  | 1 |
IRR AEs# |  | 1 |  | 1 |  | — |  | — |  | 2 |

 AEs leading to discontinuation of study treatment n = 1 (3mg/kg dose)

 #IRR (infusion-related reaction) preferred terms: chills, pyrexia, dyspnea, malaise, tachycardia, hypo/hypertension, dizziness, hypersensitivity

More specifically at the time of the interim data, 12 out of 12 AML (100%) patients showed a response, including complete remission in eight out of 12 patients, complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery in two out of 12 patients and partial remission in two out of 12 patients. One of the patients who achieved a complete remission successfully bridged to allogeneic stem cell transplant after five cycles. One patient discontinued from the study following an adverse event. Three patients responded during cusatuzumab monotherapy in the first two weeks.

Phase 2 Part of Clinical Trial in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory CD70‑positive CTCL and Phase 1 Safety-Expansion Cohorts in Patients with CD70‑positive CTCL (ongoing, completed enrollment)

The Phase 1/2 clinical trial in relapsed or refractory CD‑70 positive CTCL patients completed enrollment, consisting of 27 heavily pre-treated patients with CD70‑positive CTCL.

The primary endpoint of the Phase 2 part of the clinical trial is efficacy, and secondary endpoints include safety and characterization of pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity.

Of the 26 evaluable patients (out of 27 recruited patients) under analysis, we observed an overall response rate of 23% (one complete response, five partial responses and eight patients with stable disease). Patients received a 1 mg/kg or 5 mg/kg dose of cusatuzumab. Cusatuzumab was well tolerated at both doses with a total of 106 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) reported in 26 patients. Most common was pyrexia and asthenia (5 patients each). Forty events in 16 patients were considered drug-related by the investigator of which infusion-related reactions (IRRs) were the most common (22 events in 8 patients). Eighteen SAEs were reported in 11 patients, one was considered drug related.

92

Table of Contents

Phase 1 Part of Phase 1/2 Clinical Trial in Patients with Advanced Malignancies Expressing CD70

Cusatuzumab was evaluated in an extensive Phase 1 part of a Phase 1/2 clinical trial in patients with advanced malignancies expressing CD70, following a stepwise adaptive clinical trial design enrolling a total of 86 patients (of whom 85 patients have been treated). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The most frequent grade 3 and 4 drug-related adverse events were fatigue in 48.2% of patients and mild (Grade 1–2) infusion-related reactions in 34.1% of patients. Other monoclonal antibodies engineered using POTELLIGENT® or similar third-party products that augment ADCC such as mogamulizumab, obinutuzumab and imgatuzumab also have infusion-related reaction rates of 24% to 77%. Premedication with acetaminophen, antihistamines and/or corticosteroids are used to reduce the impact of infusion-related reactions.

There were 83 serious adverse events seen in 42 of these pre-treated patients. Many patients who enrolled in this study have failed more than one prior therapy. All drug-related adverse events referenced in this paragraph were evaluated by the investigators according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events guidelines (CTCAE v4.03). One Grade 1 (pyrexia), seven Grade 2 (infusion-related reactions), four Grade 3 (febrile neutropenia, anaemia, thrombocytopenia and fatigue—included in Table 6) and no Grade 4 serious adverse events were reported by the investigator as being drug-related. 23 patient deaths were reported in the phase 1 clinical trial, of which 17 deaths were attributed to disease progression. One patient death (Grade 5), which was deemed drug-related by the investigator, occurred in a heavily pre-treated patient with Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia and was attributed to sepsis and general condition deterioration.

Table 6. Grade 3 and 4 drug-related adverse events (including serious adverse events), in cusatuzumab in open label, Phase 1 clinical trial

Dose-escalation Part and Cohorts 1‑4 |  | 0.1 mg/kg |  | 1 mg/kg |  | 2 mg/kg |  | 5 mg/kg |  | 10 mg/kg |
Number of patients |  | 6 |  | 15 |  | 7 |  | 42 |  | 5 |
Fatigue |  | 1 |  | — |  | — |  | 3 |  | — |
Anaemia |  | — |  | — |  | — |  | 1 |  | — |
Decreased appetite |  | 1 |  | — |  | — |  | — |  | — |
Electrocardiogram qt prolonged |  | — |  | 1 |  | — |  | — |  | — |
Febrile neutropenia |  | — |  | — |  | — |  | 1 |  | — |
Hypoxia |  | 1 |  | — |  | — |  | — |  | — |
Infusion related reactions |  | — |  | — |  | — |  | 1 |  | — |
Thrombocytopenia |  | — |  | — |  | — |  | 1 |  | — |

Note: All Grade 3 drug-related adverse events. No Grade 4 drug-related adverse events reported.

All other serious adverse events were considered non-drug-related by the treating investigator.

In the dose-escalation part of this clinical trial, the half-life of ARGX‑110 was observed to be approximately 13 days. Anti-drug antibodies were detected in 50% of all patients, the majority of which were seen at the 0.1 mg/kg and 1 mg/kg doses.

ARGX‑117

We are developing ARGX‑117 with therapeutic potential in both orphan and large autoimmune inflammatory diseases. ARGX‑117 is a highly differentiated therapeutic antibody equipped with our proprietary Fc engineering technology NHance® that addresses a novel target in the classic pathway of the complement cascade. With a potentially differentiated mechanism of action, ARGX‑117 represents a broad pipeline opportunity across several autoantibody-mediated indications and may have a synergistic effect with lead autoimmune compound efgartigimod.

The classical pathway of the complement system is composed of a series of proteins that are activated when IgG or IgM autoantibodies bind to their targets. This mechanism contributes to tissue damage and organ

93

Table of Contents

dysfunction in a number of autoimmune inflammatory diseases. The ARGX‑117 target is key in the lysis of antibody-decorated cells and is active when an immune reaction is taking place.

We obtained the rights to ARGX‑117 as part of our Innovative Access Program through which we identified the work on this antibody with Broteio Pharma. argenx and Broteio launched a collaboration in 2017 to conduct research, with support from the University of Utrecht, to demonstrate preclinical proof-of-concept of the mechanism of ARGX‑117. Based on promising preclinical data generated under this collaboration agreement, argenx has exercised the exclusive option to license the program and assumed responsibility for further development and commercialization.

A Phase 1 trial of ARGX‑117 in healthy volunteers is expected to begin in the first quarter of 2020. Multiple doses and formulations (IV and SC with Halozyme ENHANZE® technology) will be evaluated as part of dose-finding work. Following analysis of this Phase 1 data, we expect to launch the Phase 2 program in multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) (which fits within our neuromuscular franchise) and develop ARGX‑117 in additional indications.

ARGX‑118

We have exercised our option to exclusively acquire rights to ARGX‑118, a highly differentiated antibody against Galectin‑10, the protein of Charcot-Leyden crystals, which are implicated as a major contributor to severe asthma and to the persistence of mucus plugs. ARGX‑118 has the following differentiated features:

(i) acts on a novel target intended to address mucus plugging, a large unmet need in airway inflammation;

(ii) unique mechanism of action with observed crystal-dissolving properties; and

(iii) broad potential in severe airway inflammation diseases where mucus plugging plays a key role, including lung attack or asthma exacerbation, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps.

ARGX‑118 was developed under a collaboration with VIB, a life sciences research institute based in Flanders, Belgium. Lead optimization work on ARGX‑118 for airway inflammation will continue in 2020.

94

Table of Contents

Our Partnered Programs

Our product candidate pipeline enabled by our suite of technologies is set forth below:

The following is the pipeline for our partnered product candidates and discovery programs. For more information on our collaborations, see “Collaboration Agreements" below.

ARGX‑112 (partnered with LEO Pharma)

We are developing ARGX‑112 for the treatment of dermatologic indications involving inflammation, together with our collaboration partner LEO Pharma. ARGX‑112 employs our SIMPLE Antibody TM technology and blocks the interleukin‑22 receptor, or IL‑22R, in order to neutralize the signaling of cytokines implicated in autoimmune diseases of the skin. The program is in a Phase 1 clinical trial and LEO Pharma is responsible to fund the clinical development of the program.

ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) (partnered with AbbVie)

ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) is being developed as a cancer immunotherapy against the novel target GARP by our collaborator AbbVie. ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) employs our SIMPLE Antibody TM technology and works by stimulating a patient’s immune system after a tumor has suppressed the immune system by co-opting immunosuppressive cells such as Tregs. In August 2018, AbbVie exercised its exclusive license option to develop and commercialize ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151). ARGX‑115/ ABBV‑151 is currently being explored in a Phase 1 clincal trial by AbbVie.

ARGX‑116 (partnered with Staten Biotechnology)

We are developing ARGX‑116 for the treatment of dyslipidemia, together with our collaboration partner Staten Biotechnology. ARGX‑116 employs our SIMPLE Antibody TM technology and blocks APOC3, a metabolic target involved in triglyceride metabolism. ARGX‑116 is the first of up to three research programs under the collaboration. Under the terms of the collaboration, the parties are jointly responsible for conducting research under a mutually agreed research program, with Staten reimbursing us for all costs of carrying out our research

95

Table of Contents

responsibilities under each research program. In December 2018, Staten Biotechnology announced that it will collaborate with Novo Nordisk A/S to co-develop ARGX‑116.

ARGX‑114 (partnered with AgomAb)

ARGX‑114 is an HFG-mimetic SIMPLE Antibody TM directed against the MET receptor. In March 2019, we entered into an exclusive license with AgomAb to develop ARGX-114.

ARGX-109 (partnered with Genor Biopharma)

ARGX 109 employs our SIMPLE Antibody and NHance® technologies and blocks interleukin 6, or IL 6, a cell signaling protein that is an important driver of inflammatory response implicated in the transition from acute to chronic inflammation. In October 2012, we entered into an exclusive license agreement with Bird Rock Bio, Inc. (formely known as RuiYi Inc. and Anaphore, Inc.), to develop and commercialize ARGX‑109. In 2018, Bird Rock Bio and argenx mutually agreed to terminate this exclusive license agreement. Genor Biopharma, a sublicensee of Bird Rock Bio, will continue to develop ARGX‑109 for the Chinese market.

Innovative Access Program

We have developed a program designed to secure access to early, cutting edge targets, which we call our Innovative Access Program. Through our Innovative Access Program, we are able to serially collaborate with leading academic labs by providing them access to our SIMPLE Antibody TM Platform technology with the goal of expediting the validation of new targets and accelerating the addition of new product candidates to our pipeline. In return, we receive early access to these targets and provide academic groups or biotechnology companies a simple path to clinical validation and future commercialization of promising ideas in which we and the academic lab or biotechnology company both share in the upside potential.

One example of the value of the Innovative Access Program is ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151), which was developed in collaboration with the de Duve Institute / Université Catholique de Louvain. We provided antibodies to the academic groups to help validate the target. This in turn, allowed the groups to advance their work successfully, including the facilitation of supportive publications. Subsequently, this program formed the basis of our collaboration with AbbVie. ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) exemplifies how our Innovative Access Program enables us to generate product candidates against novel targets that may be of high interest for collaboration with biopharmaceutical partners. Another example is ARGX‑116, which was discovered in close collaboration with disease biology experts from Staten Biotechnology, an emerging biotechnology company specialized in the field of dyslipidemia.

In March 2017, we entered into a collaboration under our Innovative Access Program with Broteio Pharma B.V. to develop an antibody against a novel target in the complement cascade, ARGX‑117. Under the terms of the agreement, we and Broteio jointly developed the complement-targeted antibody to seek to establish preclinical proof-of-concept using our proprietary suite of technologies. Upon successful completion of these studies, we exercised an exclusive option to license the program in March 2018 and assumed responsibility for further development and commercialization.

Manufacturing and Supply

We utilize third-party contract manufacturers who act in accordance with the FDA’s good laboratory practices, or GLP, and current good manufacturing practices, cGMP, for the manufacture of drug substance and product. Currently, we contract with Lonza Sales AG, or Lonza, based in Slough, UK and Singapore, for all activities relating to the development of our cell banks, development of our manufacturing processes and the production of all drug substance, thereby using validated and scalable systems broadly accepted in our industry. We use additional contract manufacturers to fill, label, package, store and distribute investigational drug products.

96

Table of Contents

Efgartigimod, cusatuzumab, ARGX‑111 and ARGX‑112 are each manufactured using an industry-standard mammalian cell culture of a Chinese hamster ovary cell line that expresses the product, followed by multiple purification and filtration steps typically used in producing monoclonal antibodies.

All of our antibodies are manufactured by starting with cells, which are stored in a cell bank. We have one master cell bank for each product manufactured in accordance with cGMP. Half of each master cell bank is stored at a separate site with the goal that, in case of a catastrophic event at one site, sufficient vials of the master cell bank would remain at the alternative storage site to continue manufacturing.

Intellectual Property

We strive to protect the proprietary technologies that we believe are important to our business, including pursuing and maintaining patent protection intended to cover the platform technologies incorporated into, or used to produce, our product candidates, the compositions of matter of our product candidates and their methods of use, as well as other inventions that are important to our business. In addition to patent protection, we also rely on trade secrets to protect aspects of our business that are not amenable to, or that we do not consider appropriate for, patent protection, including certain aspects of our llama immunization and antibody affinity maturation approaches.

Our commercial success depends in part upon our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for commercially important technologies, inventions and know-how related to our business, defend and enforce our intellectual property rights, particularly our patent rights, preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets and operate without infringing valid and enforceable intellectual property rights of others.

The patent positions for biotechnology companies like us are generally uncertain and can involve complex legal, scientific and factual issues. In addition, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before a patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted and even challenged after issuance. As a result, we cannot guarantee that any of our platform technologies and product candidates will be protectable or remain protected by enforceable patents. We cannot predict whether the patent applications we are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient proprietary protection from competitors. Any patents that we hold may be challenged, circumvented or invalidated by third parties.

As of January 1, 2020, our patent estate (which includes both owned and in-licensed patent rights) included 26 issued U.S. patents, 30 pending U.S. patent applications, 143 issued foreign patents (including eight granted European patents that have been validated into 104 national patents) and 114 pending foreign patent applications (including 12 pending European patent applications).

Platform Technologies

With regard to our platform technologies, we own or have rights in patents and patent applications directed to our SIMPLE Antibody TM discovery platform, the ABDEG TM and NHance® platforms and the POTELLIGENT® platform.

With regard to our SIMPLE Antibody TM discovery platform, we own a patent family containing six issued U.S. patents with composition of matter claims directed to chimeric antibodies containing variable domains comprising CDRs obtained from conventional heterotetrameric llama antibodies fused to one or more domains of a human antibody, polynucleotides encoding such chimeric antibodies, libraries of expression vectors comprising cDNA sequences encoding camelid antibodies, method claims directed to the preparation of such chimeric antibodies, and methods of modulating the binding of a human target antigen to its ligand or receptor by administering such a chimeric antibody. The U.S. patents are expected to expire in 2029 to 2033. In addition, the patent family contains patents that have been granted in Australia, Europe and Israel, and at least five patent applications pending in various other countries and regions in North America, Europe and Asia. In addition, we have a second patent family containing patents granted in the United States and Australia, and eight patent applications pending in the United States and other countries in North America, Europe and Asia, with composition

97

Table of Contents

of matter claims directed to a chimeric antibody containing variable regions with CDRs derived from a llama antibody and certain amino acid substitutions corresponding to amino acids present in a human germline variable region. The granted U.S. patent and the pending U.S. patent application, if issued as a patent, are expected to expire in 2029.

With regard to the ABDEG TM platform, we co-own with, and exclusively license from, the University of Texas, a patent family containing a pending U.S. patent application with composition of matter claims directed to an isolated FcRn-antagonist comprising an variant immunoglobulin Fc region having an increased affinity for an Fc gamma receptor relative to a wild-type IgG1 Fc region, and method of use claims directed to a method of using such an FcRn-antagonist to treat certain antibody mediated disorders. The U.S. patent application, if issued as a U.S. patent, is expected to expire in 2034. In addition, we have at least 10 patent applications pending in various other countries and regions in North America, South America, Europe and Asia. In addition, we own a second patent family containing pending patent applications in the United States and 14 other jurisdictions with claims directed to methods of reducing the serum levels of an Fc-containing agent in a subject by administering to the subject an FcRn-antagonist containing a variant immunoglobulin Fc region containing certain amino acid substitutions. A U.S. patent, if issued from the U.S. patent application, is expected to expire in 2036.

With regard to the NHance® platform, we have exclusively licensed from the University of Texas two U.S. patents with composition of matter claims directed to an IgG molecule comprising a variant human Fc domain, and method of use claims directed to a method of blocking FcRn function in a subject by providing to the subject such an IgG molecule. The U.S. patents are expected to expire in 2027 to 2028. The patent family also includes a granted European patent.

With regard to the POTELLIGENT® platform, which is currently used in the production of our cusatuzumab and ARGX‑111 product candidates, we have non-exclusively licensed from BioWa certain patent rights that relate to different aspects of the POTELLIGENT® platform.

Product Candidates: Wholly-Owned Programs

With regard to the efgartigimod product candidate, efgartigimod incorporates the ABDEG TM technology platform, the coverage of which is discussed above under "Platform Technologies." It is expected that U.S. patents, if they were to issue from the two patent families directed to the ABDEG TM technology platform are expected to expire in 2034 or 2036, without taking a potential patent term extension into account.

With regard to the cusatuzumab product candidate, we have three issued U.S. patents, one with composition of matter claims directed to the cusatuzumab antibody, one with claims directed to the epitope cusatuzumab binds to, and one with claims directed to a polynucleotide that encodes antibodies that bind to the epitope cusatuzumab binds to and one U.S. patent application with method of use claims directed to the treatment of cancer with the cusatuzumab antibody. The issued U.S. patents expire in 2032 and 2033, and the U.S. patent application, if issued as a U.S. patent, is expected to expire in 2032, without taking a potential patent term extension into account. In addition, we have patents that have been granted in Japan and Russia and at least nine patent applications pending in various other countries and regions in North America, South America, Europe and Asia. Furthermore, cusatuzumab incorporates or employs the SIMPLE Antibody TM and POTELLIGENT® technology platforms, which are covered by one or more of the patents and patent applications discussed above under "Platform Technologies."

With regard to the ARGX‑111 product candidate, we have three issued U.S. patents, one with composition of matter claims directed to the ARGX‑111 antibody, one with method of use claims directed to the use of the ARGX‑111 antibody in the treatment of cancer, and one with claims directed to polynucleotides that encode the ARGX‑111 antibody and one U.S. patent application with composition of matter claims directed to ARGX‑111. The issued U.S. patents and the U.S. patent application, if issued as a U.S. patent, are expected to expire in 2031, without taking a potential patent term extension into account. In addition, we have patents that have been granted in Australia, Europe, Japan and Russia, and at least eight patent applications pending in various other countries and regions in North America, South America, Europe and Asia. Furthermore, ARGX‑111 also incorporates or

98

Table of Contents

employs the SIMPLE Antibody TM, POTELLIGENT® and NHance® technology platforms, which are covered by one or more of the patents and patent applications discussed above under "Platform Technologies." In addition, we have one U.S. patent, patents granted in Australia and Europe, and eight patent applications pending in various other countries and regions in North America, South America and Asia with composition of matter claims directed to a combination of antibodies or a multi-specific antibody, where one of the antigen binding regions in the combination of antibodies or the multi-specific antibody binds the epitope bound by the ARGX‑111 antibody. The U.S. patent is expected to expire in 2033.

Product Candidates: Partnered Programs

With regard to the ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) product candidate, we co-own with, and exclusively license from, the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research and Université Catholique de Louvain, a pending U.S. patent application with composition of matter claims directed to an antibody that binds GARP the presence of TGF-b and method of use claims directed to the use of such an antibody in the treatment of cancer. A U.S. patent, if issued from the U.S. patent application, is expected to expire in 2034, without taking a potential patent term extension into account. In addition, the patent family contains at least 10 patent applications pending in various other countries and regions in North America, South America, Europe and Asia. In addition, we co-own with, and exclusively license from, the Université Catholique de Louvain patent applications pending in the United States and Europe with composition of matter claims directed to an antibody that binds an epitope of a complex formed by human GARP and TGF-b and method of use claims directed to the use of such an antibody in the treatment of cancer. A U.S. patent, if issued from the U.S. patent application, is expected to expire in 2034. Furthermore, ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) incorporates or employs the SIMPLE Antibody TM technology platform, which is covered by one or more of the patents and patent applications discussed above under "Platform Technologies."

With regard to the ARGX 109 product candidate, we have a pending U.S. patent application with composition of matter claims directed to ARGX 109. A U.S. patent, if it were to issue, would be expected to expire in 2033, without taking a potential patent term extension into account. We also have counterpart patents and pending patent applications in various jurisdictions, including North America, Europe and Asia. Furthermore, ARGX 109 incorporates or employs the SIMPLE Antibody technology and the NHance® technology, which is covered by one or more of the patents and patent applications discussed above under “Platform Technologies.”

With regard to the ARGX‑112 product candidate, we have a pending international application with composition of matter claims directed to an antibody that binds human IL‑22R. A U.S. patent, if it were to issue, that claims priority to the international application would be expected to expire in 2037, without taking a potential patent term extension into account. Furthermore, ARGX‑112 incorporates the SIMPLE Antibody TM technology, which is covered by one or more of the patents and patent applications discussed above under "Platform Technologies."

The term of individual patents depends upon the legal term of the patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries in which we file, the patent term is 20 years from the earliest date of filing a non-provisional patent application.

In the United States, the term of a patent covering an FDA-approved drug may be eligible for a patent term extension under the Hatch-Waxman Act as compensation for the loss of patent term during the FDA regulatory review process. The period of extension may be up to five years beyond the expiration of the patent but cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval. Only one patent among those eligible for an extension may be extended. Similar provisions are available in Europe and in certain other jurisdictions to extend the term of a patent that covers an approved drug. It is possible that issued U.S. patents covering each of our product candidates may be entitled to patent term extensions. If our product candidates receive FDA approval, we intend to apply for patent term extensions, if available, to extend the term of patents that cover the approved product candidates. We also intend to seek patent term extensions in any jurisdictions where they are available, however, there is no guarantee that the applicable authorities, including the FDA, will agree with our assessment of whether such extensions should be granted, and even if granted, the length of such extensions.

99

Table of Contents

In addition to patent protection, we also rely on trade secret protection for our proprietary information that is not amenable to, or that we do not consider appropriate for, patent protection, including, for example, certain aspects of our llama immunization and antibody affinity maturation approaches. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect. Although we take steps to protect our proprietary information, including restricting access to our premises and our confidential information, as well as entering into agreements with our employees, consultants, advisors and potential collaborators, third parties may independently develop the same or similar proprietary information or may otherwise gain access to our proprietary information. As a result, we may be unable to meaningfully protect our trade secrets and proprietary information.

Collaboration Agreements

We have a disciplined strategy to maximize the value of our pipeline whereby we plan to retain all development and commercialization rights to those product candidates that we believe we can ultimately commercialize successfully, if approved.

We have partnered, and plan to continue to partner, product candidates that we believe have promising utility in disease areas or patient populations that are better served by resources of larger biopharmaceutical companies. We expect to continue to collaborate selectively with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to leverage our discovery platform and accelerate product candidate development. We have entered into multiple collaboration agreements with pharmaceutical partners. Below are summaries of our agreements with pharmaceutical partners.

Our Strategic Partnership with Janssen (for cusatuzumab)

In December 2018, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Cilag GmbH International, an affiliate of Janssen, to jointly develop and commercialize cusatuzumab.

We have granted Janssen a license to the cusatuzumab program to develop, manufacture and commercialize cusatuzumab. For the U.S., the granted commercialization license is co-exclusive with us, while outside the U.S., the granted license is exclusive to Janssen. We and Janssen will assume certain development obligations, and will be jointly responsible for all research, development and regulatory costs relating to the cusatuzumab.

Under the terms of the agreement, Janssen has paid us $300 million in an upfront, non-refundable and non-creditable payment. In conjunction with the collaboration agreement, we entered into an investment agreement with JJDC, Inc., or JJDC, an affiliate of Johnson & Johnson. At the closing of the transaction in January 2019, JJDC purchased 1,766,899 newly issued shares, representing 4.68% of our then outstanding shares, at a price of €100.02 per share ($113.19 based on the exchange rate in effect as of the date the payment was received), for a total of €176.7 million (approximately $200.0 million based on the exchange rate in effect as of the date the payment was received).

We are eligible to receive potentially up to $1.3 billion in development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments, in addition to tiered royalties on sales for the territory outside of the U.S. at percentages ranging from the low double digits to the high teens, subject to customary reductions. In December 2019, we announced the achievement of the first milestone of $25 million for achievement of an enrollment milestone in first Phase 2 trial under the collaboration. Janssen will be responsible for commercialization worldwide. We retain the option to participate in co-commercialization efforts in the U.S., where the companies have agreed to share royalties on a 50/50 basis, and outside the U.S., Janssen will pay double-digit tiered sales royalties to us. The agreement includes customary standstill and lock-up provisions.

Under the terms of the collaboration agreement, we agreed to a joint global clinical development plan to develop cusatuzumab in AML, MDS and other potential indications in the future. Unless otherwise determined by the parties, Janssen shall be responsible for conducting the development activities specified in the global clinical development plan, subject to certain diligence obligations. The parties have equal decision-making authority and

100

Table of Contents

shall make consensus decisions regarding the global clinical development plan, with certain exceptions related to the territory outside of the U.S. Development costs shall be borne by both parties based on a cost sharing arrangement.

With respect to commercialization activities in the U.S., argenx shall have the right, but not the obligation, to elect to perform certain of the commercial efforts. Janssen has sole responsibility, at its sole cost and expense, to commercialize cusatuzumab outside of the U.S., subject to certain diligence obligations.

Unless earlier terminated upon mutual agreement, for material breach or as otherwise specified in the agreement, the collaboration term ends on a product-by-product, country-by-country basis, upon the expiration of all payment obligations in such country. With respect to the U.S., the agreement shall survive so long as any product covered by the agreement is being sold in the U.S. For the outside of U.S. territory, the royalty term expires on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis on the date that is the later of (i) 10 years after the first commercial sale of such product sold in that country, (ii) such time as there are no valid claims covering such product or (iii) the expiration of regulatory exclusivity for such product in such country.

Our Strategic Partnership with AbbVie (for ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151))

In April 2016, we entered into a collaboration agreement with AbbVie S.À.R.L., or AbbVie, to develop and commercialize ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151). Under the terms of the collaboration agreement, we were responsible for conducting and funding all ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) research and development activities up to completion of IND-enabling studies.

We have granted AbbVie an exclusive option, for a specified period following completion of IND-enabling studies, to obtain a worldwide, exclusive license to the ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) program to develop and commercialize products. Following the exercise of the option, AbbVie will assume certain development obligations, and will be solely responsible for all research, development and regulatory costs relating to the products. We received an upfront, non-refundable, non-creditable payment of $40.0 million (€35.1 million based on the exchange rate in effect as of the date the payment was received) from AbbVie for the exclusive option to license ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151). During the course of the collaboration, we achieved two pre-defined preclinical milestones, each of which triggered a $10.0 million payment (€8.9 million based on the exchange rate in effect as of the date the first pre-clinical milestone payment was received and €8.7 million based on the exchange rate in effect as of the date the second pre-clinical milestone payment was received). In addition, in March 2019, we achieved the first pre-defined clinical milestone, triggering a $30 million payment.

In August 2018, AbbVie exercised its option to develop and commercialize ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) and has now assumed certain development obligations, including being solely responsible for all research, development and regulatory costs relating to ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151)-based products. Subject to the continuing progress of ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) by AbbVie, we are eligible to receive development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments in aggregate amounts of up to $110.0 million, $190.0 million and $325.0 million, respectively, as well as tiered royalties on product sales at percentages ranging from the mid-single digits to the lower teens, subject to customary reductions.

We have the right, on a product-by-product basis to co-promote ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151)-based products in the European Economic Area and Switzerland and combine the product with our own future oncology programs. The co-promotion effort would be governed by a co-promotion agreement negotiated in good faith by the parties.

Unless earlier terminated upon mutual agreement, for material breach or as otherwise specified in the agreement, the term of the option and license agreement ends, with respect to the ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) program, upon the earliest of (i) a technical failure of the IND-enabling studies which is outside of our control, (ii) AbbVie’s election to not exercise its option, or (iii) following AbbVie’s exercise of the option, fulfilment of all payment obligations under the agreement. AbbVie may terminate the agreement for any reason upon prior written notice to us. AbbVie’s royalty payment obligations expire, on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis, on the date that is the later of (i) such time as there are no valid claims covering such product, (ii) expiration of

101

Table of Contents

regulatory or market exclusivity in respect of such product or (iii) 10 years after the first commercial sale of such product sold in that country under the agreement.

Our Collaboration with Genor Biopharma/Bird Rock Bio (for ARGX 109)

In October 2012, we entered into an exclusive license agreement with Bird Rock Bio, Inc. (formely known as RuiYi Inc. and Anaphore, Inc.), to develop and commercialize ARGX‑109. In 2018, we and Bird Rock Bio mutually agreed to terminate this exclusive license agreement. Genor Biopharma, a sublicensee of Bird Rock Bio, will continue to develop ARGX‑109 for the Chinese market.

Our Strategic Partnership with LEO Pharma (for ARGX‑112)

In May 2015, we entered into a collaboration agreement with LEO Pharma A/S, or LEO Pharma, to develop and commercialize ARGX‑112. Under the terms of the collaboration, LEO Pharma funded more than half of all product development costs up to CTA approval of a first product in a Phase 1 clinical trial, with our share of such costs capped. Now that CTA approval of a first product in a Phase 1 clinical trial has been received (in April 2018), LEO Pharma is solely responsible for funding the clinical development of the program.

We received a non-refundable, non-creditable upfront payment from LEO Pharma of €3.0 million in cash. In February 2016, June 2017 and April 2018, we achieved preclinical milestones under this collaboration for which we received milestone payments. Up through specified periods following the latest to occur of (i) submission of an application to commence a Phase 2b dose finding trial (or Phase 3 clinical trial if a Phase 2b is not conducted) or (ii) the availability of an International Preliminary Examination report for ARGX‑112 patent rights after completion of a Phase 2a clinical trial, LEO Pharma may exercise an option to obtain an exclusive, worldwide license to further develop and commercialize products. Following the exercise of the option, LEO Pharma would assume full responsibility for the continued development, manufacture and commercialization of such product, subject to certain diligence obligations. If LEO Pharma elects to exercise this option, it must pay us an option fee. We are also eligible to receive additional development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments in aggregate amounts of up to €11.5 million, €6.0 million and €102.5 million, respectively, as well as tiered royalties on product sales at percentages ranging from the low single digits to the low teens, subject to customary reductions.

If LEO Pharma does not exercise its option prior to expiration of the applicable option period, if it does not meet certain development diligence obligations within a specified time, or if the agreement is terminated other than for reasons of our breach or insolvency, then we have the right to develop and commercialize ARGX‑112 alone, subject to our obligation to pay LEO Pharma low-single digit percentage royalties on net sales of any product covered by any LEO Pharma patents, know-how or rights in research results generated under the collaboration. If the agreement is terminated for reasons of our breach or insolvency, rights to product candidates in development at the time of such termination will be allocated to the parties through a mechanism specified in the agreement.

Unless earlier terminated upon mutual agreement, for material breach or as otherwise specified in the agreement, the term of the agreement ends upon the later of (i) the expiration of the option period, (ii) the expiration of the last license which has been granted under the agreement, and (iii) the fulfilment of all payment obligations which may arise under the agreement. LEO Pharma may terminate the agreement for any reason upon prior written notice to us. LEO Pharma’s royalty payment obligations expire, on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis, on the date that is the later of (i) such time as there are no valid claims covering such product, (ii) in major market countries in which no composition of matter patent has been issued covering such product, the expiration of the data exclusivity period or (iii) in countries that are not major market countries, a double-digit number of years after the first commercial sale of such product sold in that country under the agreement.

Our Research Collaboration with Staten (for ARGX‑116)

In January 2015, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Staten Biotechnology B.V., or Staten, to develop and commercialize products in the area of dyslipidemia therapy. Under the collaboration agreement, the

102

Table of Contents

parties sought to discover and characterize antibodies against a human target with therapeutic relevance in the field of dyslipidemia and/or cardiovascular disease. The parties may also commence two further research programs for targets with therapeutic relevance in these areas. Each research program will last no more than 24 months from commencement unless the parties agree otherwise. The first research program under this agreement proceeded as planned and was extended to December 2017, with ARGX‑116 identified as the initial product candidate. Staten exercised its exclusive option to license ARGX‑116 in March 2017. Under the terms of the collaboration, the parties were and are jointly responsible for conducting research under a mutually agreed research plan, with Staten reimbursing us for all costs of carrying out our research responsibilities under each research program. Staten is also responsible for additional clinical development.

On a research program-by-research program basis, up through a specified period within such research program, we have granted Staten an option to obtain an exclusive, worldwide, permanent license to research, develop and commercialize products identified in that program. If Staten elects to exercise this option for a product (as it has for ARGX‑116), it would be obligated to pay us a percentage of any payments payable to or on behalf of Staten’s shareholders in the event of (i) a change of control of Staten, (ii) any licensing, sale, disposition or similar transaction relating to any such product, or (iii) otherwise from the research, development or commercialization of that product. This percentage varies by stage of development for an applicable product and ranges up to the low-twenties, subject to downward proportional adjustment in the event a portion of the proceeds from the applicable transaction does not include payment for the product candidate we developed with Staten. Staten has certain diligence obligations to develop and commercialize at least one product during the term of the agreement and must report on their progress in doing so on an annual basis.

In December 2018, Staten announced that it had entered into a collaboration and exclusive option agreement with Novo Nordisk, to develop novel therapeutics for the treatment of hypertriglyceridemia. Specifically, Novo will provide research and development funding and support to Staten, to develop its lead asset STT‑5058 (formerly ARGX‑116) for the treatment of dyslipidemia. Novo has the right under the agreement to acquire Staten and gain worldwide rights to STT‑5058. Staten and its shareholders will potentially receive signing and exercise fees, research and development funding, and milestone payments of up to 430 million Euro.

If Staten does not exercise its option with respect to a research program prior to expiration of the applicable option period, then we have the right to research, develop and commercialize product candidates in relation to the relevant target at our sole cost and expense.

Unless earlier terminated upon mutual agreement, for material breach or as otherwise specified in the agreement, the collaboration term ends on the later of (i) January 2020, (ii) expiration of the last license granted by us under the agreement, (iii) expiration of last option period for Staten and (iv) fulfilment of all payment obligations which have arisen or may arise pursuant to the agreement. In addition, we may terminate the agreement in whole or with respect to a research program if no targets have been selected within 24 months of the effective date of the agreement, other than the target selected for the ARGX‑116 research program.

Our Strategic Collaboration with Shire

In February 2012, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Shire AG (now known as Shire International GmbH), or Shire, to discover, develop and commercialize novel human therapeutic antibodies against up to three targets to address diverse, rare and unmet diseases. Under the terms of the collaboration, for any target selected for study under the collaboration, the parties worked together to conduct research and development through discovery of antibodies with certain specificity for and functional activity against those targets.

Up through a specified period following completion of each study for a target, we have granted Shire an exclusive option to obtain all right, title and interest in any antibodies discovered under a study and to obtain an exclusive, worldwide license under our intellectual property which is necessary to further develop and commercialize products incorporating such antibodies. Following exercise of its exclusive option, Shire has certain diligence obligations to develop and commercialize at least one product. To exercise this option with respect to

103

Table of Contents

antibodies discovered against any of the three initial targets named in the agreement, Shire paid us a one-time option fee.

In May 2014, we expanded the collaboration agreement to accommodate research and development of additional novel targets implicated in multiple disease areas to provide Shire with a sublicense under our license agreement with the University of Texas with respect to our NHance® and ABDEG TM engineering technologies and to provide an option to a sublicense to the POTELLIGENT® technology of BioWa, Inc. The initial three-year term of this expanded agreement expired on May 30, 2017, and Shire opted to extend the collaboration term for a further year until May 30, 2018, but no further beyond May 2018.

Shire may exercise exclusive options to develop and commercialize programs arising under our expanded agreement, in which case an option fee is due on a per program basis. In July 2018, Shire exercised such an exclusive option to in-license an antibody discovered and developed using our licensed technologies, which exercise triggered a milestone payment by Shire to argenx, in an amount undisclosed due to contractual obligations of confidentiality.

In addition to option fees, Shire would also be obligated to pay us on a per-product basis upon achievement of specified development, regulatory and commercial milestones and a percentage of net sales as a royalty. Milestones are paid on a first product per indication per study target basis, and we are eligible to receive payments in aggregate amounts of up to $3.8 million, $4.5 million and $22.5 million, upon achievement of development, regulatory and commercial milestones, respectively, for a product generated against one of the three initial targets named in the 2012 agreement. For products generated against additional targets nominated under the 2014 agreement, development and regulatory milestone payments remain the same, and we are eligible to receive payments in aggregate amounts of up to $60.0 million for achievement of commercial milestones. The royalties payable to us are tiered, single digit and are subject to customary reductions. Through December 31, 2019, pursuant to the agreement Shire has paid us an aggregate total of (i) €3.4 million in upfront payments, (ii) €0.3 million in milestone payments and (iii) $12.6 million in research and development funding. In addition, Shire purchased 12.0 million of our ordinary shares in July 2014 by participating in our initial public offering on Euronext Brussels.

If Shire does not exercise its option with respect to any discovered antibody within a specified period, then we are free to research, develop and commercialize antibodies in relation to the applicable study target, subject to negotiation of a license from Shire for the use of any antibodies that were discovered during the applicable study, or any Shire confidential information, Shire intellectual property or Shire’s interest in any joint intellectual property. If (a) Shire (i) does not exercise its option with respect to any discovered antibody, or (ii) exercises its option but later abandons development of such antibody or (iii) the agreement is terminated other than for our breach or insolvency, and (b) Shire is no longer pursuing a development program with respect to the applicable study target, then we may elect to continue the development of such antibody at our sole cost and expense, subject to negotiation of a license from Shire under which Shire will receive either specified royalties, if we commercialize the program ourselves, or a percentage of sublicensing revenues, if the program is subsequently sublicensed to a third party.

Unless earlier terminated upon mutual agreement, for material breach or as otherwise specified in the agreement, the collaboration term ends with the expiry of the last royalty term under the agreement. Each royalty term expires, on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis, on the date that is the later of (i) such time as there are no valid claims covering such product or (ii) 10 years after the first commercial sale of such product sold in that country under the agreement. Shire may terminate the agreement for any reason upon prior written notice to us.

License Agreements

We are a party to several license agreements under which we license patents, patent applications and other intellectual property to third parties. The licensed intellectual property covers some of our product candidates and

104

Table of Contents

some of the Fc engineering technologies that we use. Some of these licenses impose various diligence and financial payment obligations on us. We expect to continue to enter into these types of license agreements in the future.

Our Exclusive License with Halozyme (ENHANZE)

In February 2019, we entered into a license agreement with Halozyme Inc., or Halozyme, for the use of certain patents, materials and know-how owned by Halozyme and relating to its ENHANZE® Technology, for application in the field of prevention and treatment of human diseases. ENHANZE® Technology is referred to herein as ENHANZE. Under the terms of the license, we were granted exclusive rights to apply ENHANZE to biologic products against pre-specified targets, in order to research, develop and commercialize subcutaneous formulations of our therapeutic antibody-based product candidates.

Our first therapeutic target for which we have received an exclusive license from Halozyme is FcRn, which allows us to apply ENHANZE to efgartigimod and any other product candidates selective and specific for FcRn. Moreover, the breadth of our exclusive license to FcRn precludes either Halozyme itself or any of its current or future partners from utilizing ENHANZE in the context of an FcRn-targeted product. Our second therapeutic target for which we received an exclusive license from Halozyme is human complement factor C2 associated with the product candidate ARGX‑117, which is being developed to treat severe autoimmune diseases. Under the license terms, we also have the right to nominate future targets - again for an exclusive ENHANZE license if the target in question has not already been licensed by Halozyme or is not already being pursued by Halozyme. From the effective date of the license agreement, we have a four-year period in which to conduct research and preclinical studies on other target-specific molecules in combination with ENHANZE and may nominate a maximum of one additional target for an exclusive commercial license during the four-year term.

In return for the FcRn exclusive license, we have made a $30 million upfront payment to Halozyme. In return for the nomination of and exclusive license on C2, we made a $10 million milestone payment in May 2019. Upon nomination of any future target for an exclusive commercialization license and confirmation by Halozyme that such a license is available, we will pay $10 million to Halozyme per target. We will be obligated to pay clinical development, regulatory and commercial milestones totaling $160 million for the first product that uses ENHANZE and is specific for a given target. Throughout the term of the agreement, we must provide Halozyme on an annual basis a guidance forecast setting out all projected milestone payments for products for the following four calendar quarters. We are also obligated to pay Halozyme a percentage of net sales as a royalty of any licensed product that uses ENHANZE. This royalty varies with net sales volume, ranging from the low to mid-single digits, and it is reduced by a maximum of 50% if following 10 years from the first commercial sale of the product in a country, the last valid claim within the licensed ENHANZE patent(s) expires. Throughout the term of the agreement, we must provide Halozyme on an annual basis an estimate of royalty payments anticipated for the following four calendar quarters. We have certain diligence requirements with respect to development and commercialization of product candidates, but we are not obligated to utilize ENHANZE for every product candidate directed to a given exclusive target(s).

Under the terms of the license and subject to certain restrictions, we have the right to grant sublicenses to third parties both for research/preclinical work (for example, to subcontractors) and for development and commercialization. Halozyme has no rights to any of our current or future product candidates which use the ENHANZE technology. Halozyme provides dedicated specialist support to us which it has accrued over ten years of licensing ENHANZE to its collaborators.

We may terminate the license agreement at any time, either in its entirety or on a target-by-target basis, by sending Halozyme prior written notice. Absent early termination, the agreement will automatically expire upon the expiry of our royalty payment obligations under the agreement. In the event the agreement is terminated for any reason, the license granted to us would terminate but Halozyme would grant our sublicensees a direct license following such termination. In the event the agreement is terminated other than for our breach, we would retain the right to sell licensed products then on hand for a certain period of time post-termination.

105

Table of Contents

As also set out in “Item 6.A.—Directors, Senior Management and Employees”, our non-executive director James M. Daly is also a non-executive member of the board of directors of Halozyme. Despite this, our entering into the license agreement with Halozyme was not a related party transaction in accordance with IAS 24 – Related Party Disclosures, since Mr. Daly, in his role as non-executive director, does not control or have significant influence over our company or Halozyme. Mr. Daly did not participate in any discussions and decision making relating to the Halozyme license agreement. Consequently, no further disclosures regarding Halozyme have been added in “Item 7.B.—Related Party Transactions”.

Our Exclusive License with AgomAb (ARGX‑114)

In March 2019, we entered into an exclusive license with AgomAb Therapeutics NV, or AgomAb, for the use of certain patents rights relating to our proprietary suite of technologies for the development and commercialization of a series of agonistic anti-MET SIMPLE Antibodies, including ARGX‑114, an HFG-mimetic SIMPLE Antibody TM directed against the MET receptor. AgomAb is required to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize at least one licensed product. In connection with our entry into this agreement, we received a profit sharing certificate which entitles us to 20% of all distributions to AgomAb’s shareholders (which shall be reduced to 10% following the filing of an IND and is subject to further adjustment upon the occurrence of certain financings). Upon the occurrence of a qualified IPO of AgomAb, the profit sharing certificate will automatically be converted into an equivalent number of ordinary shares of AgomAb. This agreement is subject to mutual termination for material breach or insolvency and automatically expires upon the expiration of the last to expire of our licensed patent rights.

Our Exclusive License with Broteio (ARGX‑117)

In March 2017, we entered into a collaboration under our Innovative Access Program with Broteio Pharma B.V., or Broteio, to develop an antibody against a novel target in the complement cascade, ARGX‑117. Under the terms of the agreement, we and Broteio jointly developed the complement-targeted antibody to seek to establish preclinical proof-of-concept using our proprietary suite of technologies. Upon successful completion of these studies, we exercised an exclusive option to license the program in March 2018 and assumed responsibility for further development and commercialization. Under this agreement, we are obligated to make milestone payments upon the occurrence of certain development milestones (up to an aggregate of €4,000,000), commercialization milestones (up to an aggregate of €10,000,000) and pay tiered royalties on net sales in the low single digits. We may terminate this agreement for convenience upon 90 days prior written notice. This agreement is also subject to mutual termination for material breach or insolvency and automatically expires upon the expiration of our financial obligations thereunder.

Our Exclusive License with VIB (ARGX‑118)

In November 2016, we entered into a collaboration under our Innovative Access Program with VIB vzw, or VIB, an inflammation research center in Ghent, Brussels, to develop antibodies against Galectin‑10, the protein of Charcot-Leyden Crystals, which play a major role in severe asthma and the persistence of mucus plugs, including ARGX‑118. Under the terms of the agreement, we and VIB jointly developed antibodies against Galectin‑10 using our proprietary suite of technologies. Upon successful completion of this initial research, we exercised an exclusive option to license the program and assumed responsibility for further development and commercialization. Under this agreement, including a November 2018 amendment, we are obligated to make milestone payments upon the occurrence of certain development milestones (up to an aggregate of €4,025,000), commercialization milestones (up to an aggregate of €11,000,000) and pay tiered royalties on net sales in the low single digits. We may terminate this agreement for convenience upon 90 days prior written notice. This agreement is also subject to mutual termination for material breach, insolvency or certain patent challenges and automatically expires upon the expiration of VIB’s licensed patent rights.

106

Table of Contents

Our Exclusive License with the University of Texas (NHance® and ABDEG TM)

In February 2012, we entered into an exclusive license with The Board of Regents of The University of Texas System, or UoT, for use of certain patents rights relating to the NHance® platform, for any use worldwide. The agreement was amended on December 23, 2014 to also include certain additional patent rights relating to the ABDEG TM platform.

Upon commercialization of any of our products that use the in-licensed patent rights, we will be obligated to pay UoT a percentage of net sales as a royalty until the expiration of any patents covering the product. This royalty varies with net sales volume and is subject to an adjustment for royalties we receive from a sublicensee of our rights under this agreement, but in any event does not exceed 1%. In addition, we must make annual license maintenance payments to UoT until termination of the agreement. We have assumed certain development and commercial milestone payment obligations and must report on our progress in achieving product sales on a quarterly basis. The maximum milestone payments we would be required to make is approximately $0.5 million in total. Through December 31, 2019, we have paid UoT an aggregate of $0.75 million, which includes reimbursement for UoT’s patent prosecution and maintenance costs and development milestones on products using the in-licensed patent rights. We also have certain diligence requirements with respect to development and commercialization of products which use the in-licensed patent rights.

Under the terms of the license, we have the right to grant sublicenses to third parties, subject to certain restrictions. If we receive any non-royalty income in connection with such sublicenses, we must pay UoT a percentage of such income varying from low-middle single digits to middle-upper single digits depending on the nature of the sublicense. Such fees are waived if a sublicensee agrees to pay the milestone payments as set forth in our agreement with UoT.

We may unilaterally terminate the license agreement for convenience upon prior written notice. Absent early termination, the agreement will automatically expire upon the expiration of all issued patents and filed patent applications within the patent rights covered by the agreement. Our royalty payment obligations expire, on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis, at such time as there are no valid claims covering such product.

Our Non-Exclusive License with BioWa (POTELLIGENT®)

In October 2010, we entered into a non-exclusive license agreement with BioWa, Inc., or BioWa, for use of certain patents and know-how owned by BioWa and relating to its POTELLIGENT® Technology, for use in the field of prevention and treatment of human diseases. POTELLIGENT® Technology is referred to herein as POTELLIGENT®. Under the terms of the license, we are granted a non-exclusive right to use POTELLIGENT® to research, develop and commercialize antibodies and products containing such antibodies using POTELLIGENT®. BioWa retains a right of first negotiation for the exclusive right to develop and commercialize, in certain countries only, any product we develop using POTELLIGENT®. We successfully applied POTELLIGENT® to cusatuzumab, an anti-CD70 mAb, and ARGX‑111, an anti-c-Met mAb, under this license.

Upon commercialization of our products developed using POTELLIGENT®, we will be obligated to pay BioWa a percentage of net sales of a licensed product as a royalty. This royalty varies with net sales volume, ranging in the low single digits, and it is reduced by half if during the following 10 years from the first commercial sale of the product in a country the last valid claim within the licensed patent(s) that covers the product expires or ends. In addition, we must make annual research license maintenance payments which cease with commencement of our royalty payments to BioWa. We have certain diligence requirements with respect to development and commercialization of products. We have also assumed certain development, regulatory and commercial milestone payment obligations and must report on our progress toward achieving these milestones on an annual basis. Milestones are to be paid on a commercial target-by-commercial target basis, and we are obligated to make milestone payments in aggregate amounts of up to $36.0 million per commercial target should we achieve annual global sales of over $1.0 billion.

107

Table of Contents

Under the terms of the license, we have the right to grant sublicenses to third parties, subject to certain restrictions.

We may terminate the license agreement at any time by sending BioWa prior written notice. Absent early termination, the agreement will automatically expire upon the expiry of our royalty obligations under the agreement. In the event the agreement is terminated for any reason, the license granted to us would terminate but BioWa would grant our sublicensees a direct license following such termination. In the event the agreement is terminated other than for our breach or insolvency, we would retain the right to sell licensed products then on hand for a certain period of time post-termination.

Our Non-Exclusive Licenses with BioWa and Lonza (POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV)

To scale up production of our product candidates cusatuzumab and ARGX‑111 for clinical trial and commercial supply, we required a license to a GMP cell line in which POTELLIGENT® antibodies could be expressed. This cell line, POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV, was jointly developed by BioWa and Lonza. In December 2013 and August 2014, respectively, we entered non-exclusive commercial license agreements for cusatuzumab and ARGX‑111 with BioWa and Lonza Sales AG, or Lonza, for use of certain patents and know-how relating to the POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV Technology, which is a combination of Lonza’s GS System and BioWa’s POTELLIGENT® Technology, for use in the field of prevention and treatment of human diseases. Under the terms of each commercial license, we received a non-exclusive right to research, develop and commercialize products containing an antibody generated specifically against a specific target using POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV, namely the target CD70 in the case of cusatuzumab and c-Met in the case of ARGX‑111. Both targets are designated as reserved targets under our 2010 license agreement with BioWa, which continues to govern our research, development and commercialization of products utilizing BioWa’s POTELLIGENT® Technology. Under the terms of each commercial license, BioWa retains a right of first negotiation for the exclusive right to develop and commercialize, in certain countries only, any product we develop using POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV. This right of first negotiation is not applicable in cases where we intend to grant a global license to a third party to develop and commercialize a product - as was the case with our exclusive, global collaboration and license agreement for cusatuzumab with Cilag GmbH International, an affiliate of Janssen, which was entered into on December 3, 2018. BioWa retains a right of first negotiation for the exclusive right to develop and commercialize our anti-c-Met antibody ARGX‑111, in certain countries only.

Upon commercialization of our products developed using POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV, we will be obligated to pay both BioWa and Lonza a percentage of net sales as a royalty. We are required to pay a royalty to BioWa on net sales for any specific licensed product under only one license—either the POTELLIGENT® agreement or the POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV agreement, but not both. The BioWa royalty is tiered, ranging in the low single digits and is reduced by half if during the following 10 years from the first commercial sale of the product in a country the last valid claim within the licensed BioWa patent(s) that covers the product expires or ends. The Lonza royalty varies based on whether the product is manufactured by Lonza, us or a third party, but in any event is in the low single digits and is reduced by half if during the following 10 years from the first commercial sale of the product in a country the last valid claim within the licensed Lonza patent(s) that covers the product expires or ends. In addition, we must make annual commercial license maintenance payments to BioWa on a per product basis which cease with commencement of payment of the BioWa royalty for the respective product, and annual payments to Lonza in the event that any product is manufactured by a party other than Lonza, us or one of our affiliates or strategic partners named in the agreement.

We have assumed certain development, regulatory and commercial milestone payment obligations to both BioWa and Lonza and must report on our progress toward achieving these milestones on an annual basis. We are required to pay such milestones to BioWa under only one license—either the POTELLIGENT® agreement or the POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV agreement, but not both. Payments related to the development and commercialization of cusatuzumab and ARGX‑111 are foreseen under their respective POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV agreements. Milestones are to be paid on a product-by-product basis, and we are obligated to make development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments to BioWa in aggregate amounts of up to $36.0 million per product should we achieve global annual sales of $1.0 billion. We are obligated to make development,

108

Table of Contents

regulatory and commercial milestone payments to Lonza in aggregate amounts of up to approximately £1.1 million per product, if such product is manufactured by Lonza, us or one of our affiliates or strategic partners, or £3.1 million per product, otherwise. Through December 31, 2019, we have paid BioWa an aggregate amount of $1.8 million, which includes target reservation fees and annual research license fees under our POTELLIGENT® agreement and commercial license fees and milestone payments under our POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV agreement. Through December 31, 2019, we have paid Lonza an aggregate amount of £0.5 million, which includes milestone payments under our POTELLIGENT® CHOK1SV agreement.

Under the terms of both cusatuzumab and ARGX‑111 commercial licenses, we have the right to grant sublicenses to certain pre-approved third parties, but otherwise must obtain BioWa and Lonza’s prior written consent. No prior written consent was required from either BioWa or Lonza for our exclusive global collaboration and license agreement for cusatuzumab with Cilag GmbH International, an affiliate of Janssen.

We may terminate the non-exclusive commercial license agreements at any time by sending BioWa and Lonza prior written notice. Absent early termination, the agreements will automatically expire upon the expiry of our royalty obligations under the respective agreement. In the event an agreement is terminated for any reason, the license granted to us would terminate but BioWa and Lonza would grant our sublicensees a direct license following such termination. In the event an agreement is terminated other than for our failure to make milestone or royalty payments, we would retain the right to sell the respective products then on hand for a certain period of time post-termination. Our royalty payment obligations expire, on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis, on the date that is the later of (i) 10 years after the first commercial sale of such product sold in that country under the agreement or (ii) such time as there are no valid claims covering such product.

Our Collaboration with UCL and Sopartec (GARP)

In January 2013, we entered into a collaboration and exclusive product license agreement with Université Catholique de Louvain, or UCL, and its technology transfer arm Sopartec S.A., or Sopartec, to discover and develop novel human therapeutic antibodies against GARP. Under the terms of the collaboration with UCL, each party was responsible for all of its own costs and in connection with the activities assigned to it under a mutually agreed research plan.

In January 2015, we exercised the option we had been granted to enter into an exclusive, worldwide commercial license for use of certain GARP-related intellectual property rights owned by UCL and the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research to further develop and commercialize licensed products, including the GARP-neutralizing antibody ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) which was discovered under the original collaboration. Upon the expiration of the agreement, this license would become a fully paid up, perpetual worldwide exclusive license under the GARP intellectual property for any purpose, subject to UCL’s retention of non-commercial research rights.

Under the terms of the license, we obtained the right to grant sublicenses to third parties, subject to certain restrictions. From any income we receive in connection with these sublicenses, such as from our collaboration with AbbVie (see "Our Strategic Partnership with AbbVie" above), we must pay Sopartec a percentage of that income in the lower teen digit range. Royalty payment obligations expire on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis when there are no valid claims covering the ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) product. We also have certain diligence obligations with respect to development and commercialization of ARGX‑115 (ABBV‑151) products. Through December 31, 2019, we paid an aggregate amount of €6.8 million to Sopartec, as a result of the upfront and milestone payments we received from AbbVie.

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and in the European Union and other countries and jurisdictions, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, packaging, storage, recordkeeping, labeling, advertising, promotion, distribution, marketing, post-approval monitoring and reporting, and import and export of

109

Table of Contents

pharmaceutical products, including biological products. In addition, some jurisdictions regulate the pricing of pharmaceutical products. The processes for obtaining marketing approvals in the United States and in foreign countries and jurisdictions, along with subsequent compliance with applicable statutes and regulations and other regulatory authorities, require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

Licensure and Regulation of Biologics in the United States

In the United States, our product candidates are regulated as biological products, or biologics, under the Public Health Service Act, or PHSA, and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and their implementing regulations. The failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, including nonclinical testing and clinical testing, the approval process or post-approval process, may subject an applicant to delays in the conduct of a study, regulatory review and approval, and/or administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions may include, but are not limited to, the FDA’s refusal to allow an applicant to proceed with clinical testing, refusal to approve pending applications, license suspension or revocation, withdrawal of an approval, warning or untitled letters, adverse publicity, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines and civil or criminal investigations and penalties brought by the FDA or the Department of Justice or other governmental entities.

An applicant seeking approval to market and distribute a new biologic in the United States generally must satisfactorily complete each of the following steps:

- nonclinical laboratory tests, animal studies and formulation studies all performed in accordance with the FDA’s GLP regulations;

- submission to the FDA of an IND application for human clinical testing, which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin;

- approval by an institutional review board, or IRB, representing each clinical site before each clinical trial may be initiated;

- performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials to establish the safety, potency and purity of the product candidate for each proposed indication, in accordance with Good Clinical Practices, or GCP;

- preparation and submission to the FDA of a Biologic License Application, or BLA, for a biological product requesting marketing for one or more proposed indications, including submission of detailed information on the manufacture and composition of the product in clinical development and proposed labeling;

- review of the product by an FDA advisory committee, if applicable;

- one or more FDA inspections of the manufacturing facility or facilities, including those of third parties, at which the product, or components thereof, are produced to assess compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, requirements and to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the product’s identity, strength, quality and purity;

- FDA audits of the clinical study sites to assure compliance with GCPs, and the integrity of clinical data in support of the BLA;

- payment of user fees and securing FDA approval of the BLA and licensure of the new biological product; and

110

Table of Contents

- compliance with any post-approval requirements, including the potential requirement to implement a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, and any post-approval studies required by the FDA.

Nonclinical Studies and Investigational New Drug Application

Before testing any biological product candidate in humans, the product candidate must undergo nonclinical testing. Nonclinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as animal studies to evaluate the potential for activity and toxicity. The conduct of the nonclinical tests and formulation of the compounds for testing must comply with federal regulations and requirements. The results of the nonclinical tests, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, are submitted to the FDA as part of an Investigational New Drug, or IND, application. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions about the product or conduct of the proposed clinical trial, including concerns that human research subjects will be exposed to unreasonable health risks. In that case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding FDA concerns before the clinical trial can begin.

As a result, submission of the IND may result in the FDA not allowing the trial to commence or on the terms originally specified by the sponsor in the IND. If the FDA raises concerns or questions either during this initial 30‑day period, or at any time during the IND process, it may choose to impose a partial or complete clinical hold. This order issued by the FDA would delay either a proposed clinical study or cause suspension of an ongoing study, or in the case of a partial clinical hold place limitations on the conduct of the study such as duration of treatment, until all outstanding concerns have been adequately addressed and the FDA has notified the company that investigation may proceed and then only under terms authorized by the FDA. This could cause significant delays or difficulties in completing planned clinical trials in a timely manner. The FDA may impose clinical holds on a biological product candidate at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns or non-compliance.

Human Clinical Trials in Support of a BLA

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product candidate to healthy volunteers or patients with the disease to be treated under the supervision of a qualified principal investigator in accordance with GCP requirements. Clinical trials are conducted under study protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the study, inclusion and exclusion criteria, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A protocol for each clinical trial and any subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND.

A sponsor who wishes to conduct a clinical trial outside the United States may, but need not, obtain FDA authorization to conduct the clinical trial under an IND. If a foreign clinical trial is not conducted under an IND, the sponsor may submit data from the clinical trial to the FDA in support of the BLA so long as the clinical trial is well-designed and well-conducted in accordance with GCP, including review and approval by an independent ethics committee, and the FDA is able to validate the study data through an onsite inspection, if necessary.

Further, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an institutional review board, or IRB, either centrally or individually at each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted. The IRB will consider, among other things, clinical trial design, patient informed consent, ethical factors and the safety of human subjects. An IRB must operate in compliance with FDA regulations. The FDA, IRB, or the clinical trial sponsor may suspend or discontinue a clinical trial at any time for various reasons, including a finding that the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or the subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Clinical testing also must satisfy extensive GCP rules and the requirements for informed consent. Additionally, some clinical trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical trial sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee. This group may recommend continuation of the study as planned, changes in study conduct, or cessation of the study at designated check points

111

Table of Contents

based on access to certain data from the study. Information about certain clinical studies must be submitted within specific timeframes to the National Institutes of Health for public dissemination at www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Clinical trials typically are conducted in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap or be combined. Additional studies may be required after approval.

- Phase 1 clinical trials are initially conducted in a limited population to test the product candidate for safety, including adverse effects, dose tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution, excretion and pharmacodynamics in healthy humans or, on occasion, in patients, such as cancer patients.

- Phase 2 clinical trials are generally conducted in a limited patient population to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks, evaluate the efficacy of the product candidate for specific targeted indications and determine dose tolerance and optimal dosage. Multiple Phase 2 clinical trials may be conducted by the sponsor to obtain information prior to beginning larger Phase 3 clinical trials.

- Phase 3 clinical trials proceed if the Phase 2 clinical trials demonstrate that a dose range of the product candidate is potentially effective and has an acceptable safety profile. Phase 3 clinical trials are undertaken within an expanded patient population to gather additional information about safety and effectiveness necessary to evaluate the overall benefit-risk relationship of the drug and to provide an adequate basis for physician labeling.

In some cases, the FDA may approve a BLA for a product candidate but require the sponsor to conduct additional clinical trials to further assess the product candidate’s safety and effectiveness after approval. Such post-approval trials are typically referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials. These studies are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication and to document a clinical benefit in the case of biologics approved under accelerated approval regulations. If the FDA approves a product while a company has ongoing clinical trials that were not necessary for approval, a company may be able to use the data from these clinical trials to meet all or part of any Phase 4 clinical trial requirement or to request a change in the product labeling. Failure to exhibit due diligence with regard to conducting required Phase 4 clinical trials could result in withdrawal of approval for products.

A drug being studied in clinical trials may be made available to individual patients in certain circumstances. Pursuant to the 21st Century Cures Act, as amended, the manufacturer of an investigational drug for a serious disease or condition is required to make available, such as by posting on its website, its policy on evaluating and responding to requests for individual patient access to such investigational drug. This requirement applies on the earlier of the first initiation of a Phase 2 or Phase 3 trial of the investigational drug, or as applicable, 15 days after the drug receives a designation as a breakthrough therapy, fast track product, or regenerative advanced therapy.

Compliance with cGMP Requirements

Before approving a BLA, the FDA typically will inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in full compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. The PHSA emphasizes the importance of manufacturing control for products like biologics whose attributes cannot be precisely defined. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, the sponsor must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality, potency, and purity of the final biological product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the biological product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

Manufacturers and others involved in the manufacture and distribution of products must also register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies. Both domestic and foreign manufacturing establishments must register and provide additional information to the FDA upon their initial participation in the manufacturing

112

Table of Contents

process. Any product manufactured by or imported from a facility that has not registered, whether foreign or domestic, is deemed misbranded under the FDCA. Establishments may be subject to periodic unannounced inspections by government authorities to ensure compliance with cGMPs and other laws. Manufacturers may have to provide, on request, electronic or physical records regarding their establishments. Delaying, denying, limiting, or refusing inspection by the FDA may lead to a product being deemed to be adulterated.

Review and Approval of a BLA

The results of product candidate development, nonclinical testing and clinical trials, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, are submitted to the FDA as part of a BLA requesting a license to market the product. The BLA must contain extensive manufacturing information and detailed information on the composition of the product and proposed labeling as well as payment of a user fee.

The FDA has 60 days after submission of the application to conduct an initial review to determine whether the BLA is sufficient to accept for filing based on the agency’s threshold determination that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. Once the submission has been accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the application. Under the goals and policies agreed to by the FDA under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or the PDUFA, the FDA has ten months in which to complete its initial review of a standard application and respond to the applicant, and six months for a priority review of an application. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard and priority BLAs. The review process may often be significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. The review process and the PDUFA goal date may be extended by three months if the FDA requests or if the applicant otherwise provides additional information or clarification regarding information already provided in the submission within the last three months before the PDUFA goal date.

On the basis of the FDA’s evaluation of the application and accompanying information, including the results of the inspection of the manufacturing facilities and any FDA audits of clinical trial sites to assure compliance with GCPs, the FDA may issue an approval letter, denial letter, or a complete response letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. Under the PHSA, the FDA may approve a BLA if it determines that the product is safe, pure and potent and the facility where the product will be manufactured meets standards designed to ensure that it continues to be safe, pure and potent. If the application is not approved, the FDA may issue a complete response letter, which will contain the conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the application, and when possible will outline recommended actions the sponsor might take to obtain approval of the application. Sponsors that receive a complete response letter may submit to the FDA information that represents a complete response to the issues identified by the FDA or withdraw the application or request a hearing. The FDA will not approve an application until issues identified in the complete response letter have been addressed. The FDA issues a denial letter if it determines that the establishment or product does not meet the agency’s requirements.

The FDA may also refer the application to an advisory committee for review, evaluation and recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. In particular, the FDA may refer applications for novel biological products or biological products that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee. Typically, an advisory committee is a panel of independent experts, including clinicians and other scientific experts, that reviews, evaluates and provides a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

If the FDA approves a new product, it may limit the approved indications for use of the product. It may also require that contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling. In addition, the FDA may call for post-approval studies, including Phase 4 clinical trials, to further assess the product’s safety after approval. The agency may also require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the product after commercialization, or impose other conditions, including distribution restrictions or other risk management mechanisms, including REMS, to help ensure that the benefits of the product outweigh the potential risks. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals, and elements to assure safe use,

113

Table of Contents

or ETASU. ETASU can include, but are not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring and the use of patent registries. The FDA may prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of post-market studies or surveillance programs. After approval, many types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, manufacturing changes and additional labeling claims, are subject to further testing requirements and FDA review and approval.

Fast Track, Breakthrough Therapy and Priority Review Designations

The FDA is authorized to designate certain products for expedited review if they are intended to address an unmet medical need in the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition. These programs are referred to as fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation and priority review designation.

The FDA may designate a product for fast track review if it is intended, whether alone or in combination with one or more other products, for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and it demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for such a disease or condition. For fast track products, sponsors may have greater interactions with the FDA and the FDA may initiate review of sections of a fast track product’s application before the application is complete. This rolling review may be available if the FDA determines, after preliminary evaluation of clinical data submitted by the sponsor, that a fast track product may be effective. The sponsor must also provide, and the FDA must approve, a schedule for the submission of the remaining information and the sponsor must pay applicable user fees. However, the FDA’s time period goal for reviewing a fast track application does not begin until the last section of the application is submitted. Fast track designation may be withdrawn by the FDA if the FDA believes that the designation is no longer supported by data emerging in the clinical trial process.

A product may be designated as a breakthrough therapy if it is intended, either alone or in combination with one or more other products, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. The FDA may take certain actions with respect to breakthrough therapies, including holding meetings with the sponsor throughout the development process; providing timely advice to the product sponsor regarding development and approval; involving more senior staff in the review process; assigning a cross-disciplinary project lead for the review team; and taking other steps to design the clinical trials in an efficient manner.

The FDA may designate a product for priority review if it is a product that treats a serious condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness. The FDA determines, on a case-by-case basis, whether the proposed product represents a significant improvement when compared with other available therapies. Significant improvement may be illustrated by evidence of increased effectiveness in the treatment of a condition, elimination or substantial reduction of a treatment-limiting product reaction, documented enhancement of patient compliance that may lead to improvement in serious outcomes and evidence of safety and effectiveness in a new subpopulation. A priority designation is intended to direct overall attention and resources to the evaluation of such applications, and to shorten the FDA’s goal for taking action on a marketing application from 10 months to six months.

Accelerated Approval Pathway

The FDA may grant accelerated approval to a product for a serious or life-threatening condition that provides meaningful therapeutic advantage to patients over existing treatments based upon a determination that the product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. The FDA may also grant accelerated approval for such a condition when the product has an effect on an intermediate clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality, or IMM, and that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on IMM or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. Products granted accelerated approval must meet the same statutory standards for safety and effectiveness as those granted traditional approval.

114

Table of Contents

For the purposes of accelerated approval, a surrogate endpoint is a marker, such as a laboratory measurement, radiographic image, physical sign, or other measure that is thought to predict clinical benefit but is not itself a measure of clinical benefit. Surrogate endpoints can often be measured more easily or more rapidly than clinical endpoints. An intermediate clinical endpoint is a measurement of a therapeutic effect that is considered reasonably likely to predict the clinical benefit of a product, such as an effect on IMM. The FDA has limited experience with accelerated approvals based on intermediate clinical endpoints, but has indicated that such endpoints generally may support accelerated approval where the therapeutic effect measured by the endpoint is not itself a clinical benefit and basis for traditional approval, if there is a basis for concluding that the therapeutic effect is reasonably likely to predict the ultimate clinical benefit of a product.

The accelerated approval pathway is most often used in settings in which the course of a disease is long and an extended period of time is required to measure the intended clinical benefit of a product, even if the effect on the surrogate or intermediate clinical endpoint occurs rapidly. Thus, accelerated approval has been used extensively in the development and approval of products for treatment of a variety of cancers in which the goal of therapy is generally to improve survival or decrease morbidity and the duration of the typical disease course requires lengthy and sometimes large trials to demonstrate a clinical or survival benefit.

The accelerated approval pathway is usually contingent on a sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional post-approval confirmatory studies to verify and describe the product’s clinical benefit. As a result, a product candidate approved on this basis is subject to rigorous post-marketing compliance requirements, including the completion of Phase 4 or post-approval clinical trials to confirm the effect on the clinical endpoint. Failure to conduct required post-approval studies, or confirm a clinical benefit during post-marketing studies, would allow the FDA to withdraw the product from the market on an expedited basis. All promotional materials for product candidates approved under accelerated regulations are subject to prior review by the FDA.

Post-Approval Regulation

If regulatory approval for marketing of a product or new indication for an existing product is obtained, the sponsor will be required to comply with all post-approval regulatory requirements as well as any post-approval requirements that the FDA has imposed as part of the approval process. The sponsor will be required to report certain adverse reactions and production problems to the FDA, provide updated safety and efficacy information and comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotional labeling. Manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with ongoing regulatory requirements, including cGMP regulations, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon manufacturers. Accordingly, the sponsor and its third-party manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the areas of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP regulations and other regulatory requirements.

A biological product may also be subject to official lot release, meaning that the manufacturer is required to perform certain tests on each lot of the product before it is released for distribution. If the product is subject to official lot release, the manufacturer must submit samples of each lot, together with a release protocol showing a summary of the history of manufacture of the lot and the results of all of the manufacturer’s tests performed on the lot, to the FDA. The FDA may in addition perform certain confirmatory tests on lots of some products before releasing the lots for distribution. Finally, the FDA will conduct laboratory research related to the safety, purity, potency and effectiveness of pharmaceutical products.

Once an approval is granted, the FDA may withdraw the approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical trials to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution or other restrictions under a REMS program. FDA also has authority to require post-market studies, in certain circumstances, on reduced effectiveness of a product and may

115

Table of Contents

require labeling changes related to new reduced effectiveness information. Other potential consequences for a failure to maintain regulatory compliance include, among other things:

- restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;

- fines, untitled letters or warning letters or holds on post-approval clinical trials;

- refusal of the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, or suspension or revocation of product license approvals;

- product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products; or

- injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Pharmaceutical products may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability.

Orphan Drug Designation

Orphan drug designation in the United States is designed to encourage sponsors to develop products intended for rare diseases or conditions. In the United States, a rare disease or condition is statutorily defined as a condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States or that affects more than 200,000 individuals in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the product for the disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product in the United States.

Orphan drug designation qualifies a company for tax credits and market exclusivity for seven years following the date of the product’s marketing approval if granted by the FDA. An application for designation as an orphan product can be made any time prior to the filing of an application for approval to market the product. A product becomes an orphan when it receives orphan drug designation from the Office of Orphan Products Development, or OOPD, at the FDA based on an acceptable confidential request made under the regulatory provisions. The product must then go through the review and approval process like any other product in order to be marketed.

A sponsor may request orphan drug designation of a previously unapproved product or new orphan indication for an already marketed product. In addition, a sponsor of a product that is otherwise the same product as an already approved orphan drug may seek and obtain orphan drug designation for the subsequent product for the same rare disease or condition if it can present a plausible hypothesis that its product may be clinically superior to the first drug. More than one sponsor may receive orphan drug designation for the same product for the same rare disease or condition, but each sponsor seeking orphan drug designation must file a complete request for designation.

The period of exclusivity begins on the date that the marketing application is approved by the FDA and applies only to the indication for which the product has been designated. The FDA may approve a second application for the same product for a different use or a second application for a clinically superior version of the product for the same use. The FDA cannot, however, approve the same product made by another manufacturer for the same indication during the market exclusivity period unless it has the consent of the sponsor or the sponsor is unable to provide sufficient quantities.

116

Table of Contents

Pediatric Studies and Exclusivity

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act of 2003, as amended, a BLA or supplement thereto must contain data that are adequate to assess the safety and effectiveness of the product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations, and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. Sponsors must also submit pediatric study plans prior to the assessment data. Those plans must contain an outline of the proposed pediatric study or studies the applicant plans to conduct, including study objectives and design, any deferral or waiver requests and other information required by regulation. The applicant, the FDA, and the FDA’s internal review committee must then review the information submitted, consult with each other and agree upon a final plan. The FDA or the applicant may request an amendment to the plan at any time.

The FDA may, on its own initiative or at the request of the applicant, grant deferrals for submission of some or all pediatric data until after approval of the product for use in adults, or full or partial waivers from the pediatric data requirements. Generally, the pediatric data requirements do not apply to products with orphan designation.

Pediatric exclusivity is another type of non-patent marketing exclusivity in the United States and, if granted, provides for the attachment of an additional six months of marketing protection to the term of any existing regulatory exclusivity, including the non-patent and orphan exclusivity. This six-month exclusivity may be granted if a BLA sponsor submits pediatric data that fairly respond to a written request from the FDA for such data. The data do not need to show the product to be effective in the pediatric population studied; rather, if the clinical trial is deemed to fairly respond to the FDA’s request, the additional protection is granted. If reports of requested pediatric studies are submitted to and accepted by the FDA within the statutory time limits, whatever statutory or regulatory periods of exclusivity or patent protection cover the product are extended by six months. This is not a patent term extension, but it effectively extends the regulatory period during which the FDA cannot approve another application.

Biosimilars and Exclusivity

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act, or BPCIA, established a regulatory scheme authorizing the FDA to approve biosimilars and interchangeable biosimilars. To date, while biosimilar products have been approved by the FDA for use in the United States, no interchangeable biosimilars have been approved.

Under the BPCIA, a manufacturer may submit an application for licensure of a biologic product that is "biosimilar to" or "interchangeable with" a previously approved biological product or "reference product." For the FDA to approve a biosimilar product, it must find that there are no clinically meaningful differences between the reference product and proposed biosimilar product in terms of safety, purity and potency. For the FDA to approve a biosimilar product as interchangeable with a reference product, the agency must find that the biosimilar product can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product, and (for products administered multiple times) that the biologic and the reference biologic may be switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic.

Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date of approval of the reference product. The FDA may not approve a biosimilar product until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was approved. Even if a product is considered to be a reference product eligible for exclusivity, another company could market a competing version of that product if the FDA approves a full BLA for such product containing the sponsor’s own nonclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of their product. However, to rely on such exclusivities for establishing or protecting our market position is not without risk, as such laws are subject to changes by the legislature. The BPCIA also created certain exclusivity periods for biosimilars approved as interchangeable products. At this juncture, it is unclear whether products deemed "interchangeable" by the FDA will, in fact, be readily substituted by pharmacies, which are governed by state pharmacy law.

117

Table of Contents

Regulation and Procedures Governing Approval of Medicinal Products in the European Union

In order to market any product outside of the United States, a company also must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries and jurisdictions regarding quality, safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization, commercial sales and distribution of products. Whether or not it obtains FDA approval for a product, an applicant will need to obtain the necessary approvals by the comparable foreign regulatory authorities before it can initiate clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries or jurisdictions. Specifically, the process governing approval of medicinal products in the European Union generally follows the same lines as in the United States. It entails satisfactory completion of pharmaceutical development, nonclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the medicinal product for each proposed indication. It also requires the submission to relevant competent authorities for clinical trials authorization and to the EMA or to competent authorities in European Union Member States for a marketing authorization application, or MAA, and granting of a marketing authorization by these authorities before the product can be marketed and sold in the European Union.

Clinical Trial Approval

Pursuant to the currently applicable Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC and the Directive 2005/28/EC on GCP, a system for the approval of clinical trials in the European Union has been implemented through national legislation of the member states. Under this system, an applicant must obtain approval from the competent national authority of a European Union member state in which the clinical trial is to be conducted or in multiple member states if the clinical trial is to be conducted in a number of member states. Furthermore, the applicant may only start a clinical trial at a specific study site after the independent ethics committee has issued a favorable opinion. The clinical trial application, or CTA, must be accompanied by an investigational medicinal product dossier with supporting information prescribed by Directive 2001/20/EC and Directive 2005/28/EC and corresponding national laws of the member states and further detailed in applicable guidance documents.

In April 2014, the European Union adopted a new Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014, which is set to replace the current Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC. It is expected that the new Clinical Trials Regulation will enter into force in 2020 with a three-year transition period. It will overhaul the current system of approvals for clinical trials in the European Union. Specifically, the new regulation, which will be directly applicable in all member states, aims at simplifying and streamlining the approval of clinical trials in the European Union. For instance, the new Clinical Trials Regulation provides for a streamlined application procedure via a single-entry point and strictly defined deadlines for the assessment of clinical trial applications.

Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity

Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000 and Regulation (EC) No. 847/2000 provide that a product can be designated as an orphan drug by the European Commission if its sponsor can establish: that the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of (1) a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than five in ten thousand persons in the European Union when the application is made, or (2) a life-threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic condition in the European Union and that without incentives it is unlikely that the marketing of the drug in the European Union would generate sufficient return to justify the necessary investment. For either of these conditions, the applicant must demonstrate that there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of the condition in question that has been authorized in the European Union or, if such method exists, the drug has to be of significant benefit compared to products available for the condition.

An orphan drug designation provides a number of benefits, including fee reductions, regulatory assistance and the possibility to apply for a centralized European Union marketing authorization. Marketing authorization for an orphan drug leads to a ten-year period of market exclusivity. During this market exclusivity period, neither the EMA nor the European Commission or the member states can accept an application or grant a marketing authorization for a "similar medicinal product." A "similar medicinal product" is defined as a medicinal product containing a similar active substance or substances as contained in an authorized orphan medicinal product, and

118

Table of Contents

which is intended for the same therapeutic indication. The market exclusivity period for the authorized therapeutic indication may, however, be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation because, for example, the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify market exclusivity.

Marketing Authorization

To obtain a marketing authorization for a product under the European Union regulatory system, an applicant must submit an MAA, either to EMA using the centralized procedure or to competent authorities in European Union Member States using the other procedures (decentralized procedure, national procedure, or mutual recognition procedure). A marketing authorization may be granted only to an applicant established in the European Union. Regulation (EC) No. 1901/2006 provides that prior to obtaining a marketing authorization in the European Union, an applicant must demonstrate compliance with all measures included in an EMA-approved Pediatric Investigation Plan, or PIP, covering all subsets of the pediatric population, unless the EMA has granted a product-specific waiver, class waiver, or a deferral for one or more of the measures included in the PIP.

The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single marketing authorization by the European Commission that is valid for all European Union member states. Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No. 726/2004, the centralized procedure is compulsory for specific products, including for medicines produced by certain biotechnological processes, products designated as orphan medicinal products, advanced therapy products and products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of certain diseases, including products for the treatment of cancer and auto-immune diseases. For products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of other diseases and products that are highly innovative or for which the centralized procedure is in the interest of public health, the centralized procedure may be optional.

Under the centralized procedure, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, or the CHMP, established at the EMA is responsible for conducting the assessment of a product to define its risk/benefit profile. Under the centralized procedure, the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA is 210 days, excluding clock stops when additional information or written or oral explanation is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions of the CHMP. Accelerated evaluation may be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product is of major interest from the point of view of public health and, in particular, from the viewpoint of therapeutic innovation. If the CHMP accepts such a request, the time limit of 210 days will be reduced to 150 days, but it is possible that the CHMP may revert to the standard time limit for the centralized procedure if it determines that it is no longer appropriate to conduct an accelerated assessment.

Periods of Authorization and Renewals

A marketing authorization is valid for five years, in principle, and it may be renewed after five years on the basis of a reevaluation of the risk benefit balance by the EMA or by the competent authority of the authorizing member state. To that end, the marketing authorization holder must provide the EMA or the competent authority with a consolidated version of the file in respect of quality, safety and efficacy, including all variations introduced since the marketing authorization was granted, at least six months before the marketing authorization ceases to be valid. Once renewed, the marketing authorization is valid for an unlimited period, unless the European Commission or the competent authority decides, on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with one additional five-year renewal period. Any authorization that is not followed by the placement of the drug on the European Union market (in the case of the centralized procedure) or on the market of the authorizing member state within three years after authorization ceases to be valid.

Regulatory Requirements after Marketing Authorization

Following approval, the holder of the marketing authorization is required to comply with a range of requirements applicable to the manufacturing, marketing, promotion and sale of the medicinal product. These include compliance with the European Union’s stringent pharmacovigilance or safety reporting rules, pursuant to which post-authorization studies and additional monitoring obligations can be imposed. In addition, the

119

Table of Contents

manufacturing of authorized products, for which a separate manufacturer’s license is mandatory, must also be conducted in strict compliance with the EMA’s GMP requirements and comparable requirements of other regulatory bodies in the European Union, which mandate the methods, facilities and controls used in manufacturing, processing and packing of drugs to assure their safety and identity. Finally, the marketing and promotion of authorized products, including industry-sponsored continuing medical education and advertising directed toward the prescribers of drugs and/or the general public, are strictly regulated in the European Union under Directive 2001/83EC, as amended.

Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval. Even if our product candidates are approved for marketing, sales of such product candidates will depend, in part, on the extent to which third-party payors, including government health programs in the United States (such as Medicare and Medicaid), commercial health insurers, and managed care organizations, provide coverage and establish adequate reimbursement levels for such product candidates. Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the European Union, the United States and other markets to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for newly approved products and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of our product candidates due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products.

In the United States and markets in other countries, third-party payors, including private and governmental payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs and biologics will be covered and patients who are prescribed treatments for their conditions and providers performing the prescribed services generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the associated healthcare costs. Patients are unlikely to use any product candidates we may develop unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of such product candidates. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs and biologics. Some third-party payors may require pre-approval of coverage for new or innovative devices or drug therapies before they will reimburse health care providers who use such therapies. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates. The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a product may be separate from the process for setting the price or reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the product once coverage is approved. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services and imposing controls to manage costs, especially drugs when an equivalent generic drug or a less expensive therapy is available. It is possible that a third-party payor may consider our product candidate and other therapies as substitutable and only offer to reimburse patients for the less expensive product. Even if we show improved efficacy or improved convenience of administration with our product candidate, pricing of existing drugs may limit the amount we will be able to charge for our product candidate. These payors may deny or revoke the reimbursement status of a given drug product or establish prices for new or existing marketed products at levels that are too low to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may not be able to obtain a satisfactory financial return on products that we may develop. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, also known as a formulary, which might not include all of the approved products for a particular indication.

In order to secure coverage and reimbursement for any product that might be approved for sale, we may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of the product, and the cost of these studies would be in addition to the costs required to obtain FDA or other comparable marketing approvals. Even after pharmacogenomic studies are conducted, product candidates

120

Table of Contents

may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. A decision by a third-party payor not to cover any product candidates we may develop could reduce physician utilization of such product candidates once approved and have a material adverse effect on our sales, results of operations and financial condition. Additionally, a payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. For example, the payor may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage and reimbursement for the product, and the level of coverage and reimbursement can differ significantly from payor to payor. Third-party reimbursement and coverage may not be adequate to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. The insurance coverage and reimbursement status of newly approved products for orphan diseases is particularly uncertain, and failure to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for any such product candidates could limit our ability to generate revenue.

The containment of healthcare costs also has become a priority of U.S. federal, state and international governments and the prices of pharmaceuticals have been a focus in this effort. Governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit our potential revenue from the sale of any products for which we may obtain approval. Coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more of our products for which we or our collaborators receive marketing approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future. Obtaining and maintaining reimbursement status is time-consuming and costly. No uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement for drug products exists among third-party payors in the United States. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for drug products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance. Furthermore, rules and regulations regarding reimbursement change frequently, in some cases at short notice, and we believe that changes in these rules and regulations are likely.

Outside the United States, we will face challenges in ensuring obtaining adequate coverage and payment for any product candidates we may develop. Pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control in many countries. Pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can extend well beyond the receipt of regulatory marketing approval for a product and may require us to conduct a clinical trial that compares the effectiveness of any product candidates we may develop to other available therapies to support cost-effectiveness. The conduct of such a clinical trial could be expensive, involve additional risk and result in delays in our commercialization efforts.

In the European Union, pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from country to country. Some countries provide that products may be marketed only after a reimbursement price has been agreed. Some countries may require the completion of additional studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies (so called health technology assessments, or HTAs) in order to obtain reimbursement or pricing approval. For example, the European Union provides options for its member states to restrict the range of products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. European Union member states may approve a specific price for a product or may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the product on the market. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for products but monitor and control prescription volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions. Recently, many countries in the European Union have increased the amount of discounts required on pharmaceuticals and these efforts could continue as countries attempt to manage healthcare expenditures, especially in light of the severe fiscal and debt crises experienced by many countries in the European Union. The downward pressure on health care costs in general, particularly prescription products, has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. Political, economic and regulatory developments may further

121

Table of Contents

complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Reference pricing used by various European Union member states and parallel trade (arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced member states) can further reduce prices. Special pricing and reimbursement rules may apply to orphan drugs. Inclusion of orphan drugs in reimbursement systems tend to focus on the medical usefulness, need, quality and economic benefits to patients and the healthcare system as for any drug. Acceptance of any medicinal product for reimbursement may come with cost, use and often volume restrictions, which again can vary by country. In addition, results-based rules of reimbursement may apply. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our products, if approved in those countries.

Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in Europe, Canada and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of our product candidates. In many countries, the prices of medical products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medical products but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

The delivery of healthcare in the European Union, including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than European Union, law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of healthcare and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most European Union member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever-increasing European Union and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize any products for which we obtain marketing approval.

Healthcare Law and Regulation

Healthcare providers and third-party payors play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of pharmaceutical products that are granted marketing approval. Our current and future arrangements with providers, researchers, consultants, third-party payors and customers are subject to broadly applicable federal and state fraud and abuse, anti-kickback, false claims, transparency and patient privacy laws and regulations and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain our business and/or financial arrangements. Restrictions under applicable federal and state healthcare laws and regulations include, without limitation, the following:

- the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, or AKS, which prohibits, among other things, persons and entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering, or paying remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service, for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under a federal healthcare program such as Medicare and Medicaid. . This statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on the one hand and prescribers, purchasers and formulary managers on the other. A person or entity can be found guilty of violating the AKS without actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the AKS constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act or federal civil money penalties statute. Violations of the AKS carry potentially significant civil and criminal penalties, including imprisonment, fines, administrative civil monetary penalties, and exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs;

122

Table of Contents

- the U.S. federal false claims and civil monetary penalties laws, including the civil False Claims Act and federal civil monetary penalty laws, which, among other things, impose criminal and civil penalties, including through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, against individuals or entities for knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the U.S. federal government, claims for payment or approval that are false or fraudulent, knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim or obligation to pay or transmit money to the federal government , or from knowingly making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the U.S. federal government. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items and services resulting from a violation of the U.S. federal Anti Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act. Manufacturers can be held liable under the False Claims Act even when they do not submit claims directly to government payors if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of false or fraudulent claims. The False Claims Act also permits a private individual acting as a “whistleblower” to bring qui tam actions on behalf of the federal government alleging violations of the False Claims Act and to share in any monetary recovery. When an entity is determined to have violated the federal civil False Claims Act, the government may impose civil fines and penalties for each false claim, plus treble damages, and exclude the entity from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs;

- the U.S. federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, which imposes criminal and civil liability for, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or obtaining by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, any of the money or property owned by, or under the custody or control of, any healthcare benefit program, regardless of the pay (e.g., public or private) or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement, in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services relating to healthcare matters; similar to the U.S. federal Anti Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;

- HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, and its implementing regulations, and as amended again by the Omnibus Rule in 2013, , which imposes certain obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information without appropriate authorization by covered entities subject to the Final HIPAA Omnibus Rule, i.e. certain covered health plans, healthcare clearinghouses and healthcare providers, as well as their business associates, those independent contractors or agents of covered entities that perform certain services for or on their behalf involving the use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information. HITECH also created new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates and possibly other persons, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions;

- the U.S. Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, which prohibits, among other things, the adulteration or misbranding of drugs, biologics and medical devices;

- the federal transparency requirements known as the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, collectively the ACA, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies to report annually to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, information related to payments and other transfers of value made by that entity to physicians (currently defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors) and teaching hospitals, as well as

123

Table of Contents

ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Failure to submit required information may result in civil monetary penalties for all payments, transfers of value or ownership or investment interests that are not timely, accurately, and completely reported in an annual submission. Effective January 1, 2022, these reporting obligations will extend to include transfers of value made to certain non-physician providers such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners;

- federal consumer protection and unfair competition laws, which broadly regulate marketplace activities and activities that potentially harm consumers;

- analogous state laws and regulations, including: state anti kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to our business practices, including, but not limited to, research, distribution, sales and marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by any third party payor, including commercial insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government, or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state and local laws that require the licensure of sales representatives; state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures and pricing information; state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect; and state laws related to insurance fraud in the case of claims involving private insurers; and

- European and other foreign law equivalents of each of the laws, including reporting requirements detailing interactions with and payments to healthcare providers and data privacy and security laws and regulations that may be more stringent than those in the United States.

Some state laws require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government in addition to requiring pharmaceutical manufacturers to report information related to payments to physicians and other health care providers or marketing expenditures. State and foreign laws also govern the privacy and security of health information in some circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

We will be required to spend substantial time and money to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations. Recent healthcare reform legislation has strengthened these federal and state healthcare laws. Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws.

Other laws that may affect our ability to operate include:

- the anti-inducement law prohibits, among other things, the offering or giving of remuneration, which includes, without limitation, any transfer of items or services for free or for less than fair market value (with limited exceptions), to a Medicare or Medicaid beneficiary that the person know or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary’s selection of a particular supplier of items or services reimbursable by a federal or state governmental program;

- the U.S. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, which prohibits, among other things, the adulteration or misbranding of drugs, biologics and medical devices; and

- European and other foreign law equivalents of each of the laws, including reporting requirements detailing interactions with and payments to healthcare providers.

124

Table of Contents

Violations of these laws can subject us to criminal, civil and administrative sanctions including monetary penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, individual imprisonment and exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, reputational harm, and we may be required to curtail or restructure our operations. Moreover, we expect that there will continue to be federal and state laws and regulations, proposed and implemented, that could impact our future operations and business.

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws.

Healthcare Reform

In the United States, the European Union and other foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that could affect our future results of operations. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the United States federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare. For example, in March 2010, the ACA became law. The ACA is a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms.

Among the provisions of the ACA of importance to our potential product candidates are the following:

- an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic products, apportioned among these entities according to their market share in certain government healthcare programs, although this fee would not apply to sales of certain products approved exclusively for orphan indications;

- expansion of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to certain individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level, thereby potentially increasing a manufacturer’s Medicaid rebate liability;

- expansion of manufacturers’ rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program by increasing the minimum rebate for both branded and generic drugs and revising the definition of "average manufacturer price," or AMP, for calculating and reporting Medicaid drug rebates on outpatient prescription drug prices and extending rebate liability to prescriptions for individuals enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans;

- a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for products that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected;

- expanding the types of entities eligible for the 340B drug discount program;

- establishing the Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, which requires manufacturers to provide a 50% (increased to 70% effective January 1, 2019 pursuant to subsequent legislation) point-of-sale-discount off the negotiated price of applicable products to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period as a condition for the manufacturers’ outpatient products to be covered under Medicare Part D;

- a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; and

125

Table of Contents

- establishment of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, or CMMI within CMS, to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending, potentially including prescription product spending.

Since its enactment, some of the provisions of the ACA have yet to be fully implemented, while certain provisions have been subject to judicial, congressional, and executive challenges. As a result, there have been delays in the implementation of, and action taken to repeal or replace, certain aspects of the ACA. insurance markets may rise.

Since January 2017, President Trump has signed several executive orders and other directives designed to delay, circumvent, or loosen certain requirements mandated by the ACA. On January 20, 2017, President Trump signed an Executive Order directing federal agencies with authorities and responsibilities under the ACA to waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation of any provision of the ACA that would impose a fiscal burden on states or a cost, fee, tax, penalty or regulatory burden on individuals, healthcare providers, health insurers, or manufacturers of pharmaceuticals or medical devices. Further, on October 13, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order terminating terminating the cost-sharing subsidies that reimburse insurers under the ACA. Several state Attorneys General filed suit to stop the administration from terminating the subsidies, but their request for a restraining order was denied by a federal judge in California on October 25, 2017. The loss of the cost share reduction payments is expected to increase premiums on certain policies issued by qualified health plans under the ACA. Further, on June 14, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that the federal government was not required to pay more than $12 billion in ACA risk corridor payments to third-party payors who argued were owed to them. This was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which heard arguments on December 10, 2019. We cannot predict how the U.S. Supreme Court will rule. The effects of this gap in reimbursement on third-party payors, the viability of the ACA marketplace, providers, and potentially our business, are not yet known. In December 2018, CMS published a final rule permitting further collections and payments to and from certain ACA qualified health plans and health insurance issuers under the ACA risk adjustment program in response to the outcome of the federal district court litigation regarding the method CMS uses to determine this risk adjustment. In addition, CMS published a final rule that would give states greater flexibility, starting in 2020, in setting benchmarks for insurers in the individual and small group marketplaces, which may have the effect of relaxing the essential health benefits required under the ACA for plans sold through such marketplaces. On December 10, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Moda Health Plan, Inc. v. United States, which will determine whether the government must make risk corridor payments. The Supreme Court’s decision will be released in the coming months.

While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation, two bills affecting the implementation of certain taxes under the ACA have been signed into law. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or Tax Act, includes a provision that decreased the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year, commonly referred to as the “individual mandate,” to $0, effective January 1, 2019. On December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court judge in the Northern District of Texas ruled that the individual mandate portion of the ACA is an essential and inseverable feature of the ACA, and therefore because the mandate was repealed as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. The Trump administration and CMS have both stated that the ruling will have no immediate effect, and on December 30, 2018, the same judge issued an order staying the judgment pending appeal. On December 18, 2019, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held that the individual mandate is unconstitutional and remanded the case to the lower court to reconsider its earlier invalidation of the full ACA. It is unclear how this decision and any subsequent appeals and other efforts to repeal and replace the ACA will impact the ACA and our business. Litigation and legislation over the ACA are likely to continue, with unpredictable and uncertain results. We will continue to evaluate the effect that the ACA and its possible repeal and replacement has on our business.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding. For example, on August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. A Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, tasked with recommending a targeted deficit reduction of at least

126

Table of Contents

$1.2 trillion for the years 2012 through 2021, was unable to reach required goals, thereby triggering the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year. These reductions went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, including without limitation the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, will remain in effect through 2029 unless additional Congressional action is taken. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other health care funding, which could have a material adverse effect on our customers and accordingly, our financial operations.

Moreover, payment methodologies may be subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives. The Trump administration’s budget proposal for fiscal years 2019 and 2020 contains further drug price control measures that could be enacted during the 2019 budget process or in other future legislation, including, for example, measures to permit Medicare Part D plans to negotiate the price of certain drugs under Medicare Part B, to allow some states to negotiate drug prices under Medicaid, and to eliminate cost sharing for generic drugs for low-income patients. Additionally, the Trump administration released a "Blueprint" to lower drug prices and reduce out of pocket costs of drugs that contains additional proposals to increase manufacturer competition, increase the negotiating power of certain federal healthcare programs, incentivize manufacturers to lower the list price of their products and reduce the out of pocket costs of drug products paid by consumers. While any proposed measures will require authorization through additional legislation to become effective, Congress and the Trump administration have each indicated that it will continue to seek new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has already started the process of soliciting feedback on some of these measures and, at the same time, is immediately implementing others under its existing authority. For example, in May 2019, CMS issued a final rule to allow Medicare Advantage Plans the option of using step therapy for Part B drugs beginning January 1, 2020. This final rule codified CMS’s policy change that was effective January 1, 2019.

In May 2019, CMS issued a final rule to allow Medicare Advantage Plans the option of using step therapy, a type of prior authorization, for Part B drugs beginning January 1, 2020. This final rule codified CMS’s policy change that was effective January 1, 2019.

In addition, recently there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures.

Further, legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical products. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals, if any, of our product candidates, may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing conditions and other requirements.

127

Table of Contents

Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly aggressive in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our products or put pressure on our product pricing, which could negatively affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

In the European Union, similar political, economic and regulatory developments may affect our ability to profitably commercialize our current or any future products. In addition to continuing pressure on prices and cost containment measures, legislative developments at the European Union or member state level may result in significant additional requirements or obstacles that may increase our operating costs. The delivery of healthcare in the European Union, including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than European Union, law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of health care and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most European Union member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever-increasing European Union and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize any products for which we obtain marketing approval. In international markets, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies.

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we or our collaborators are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we or our collaborators are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, our product candidates may lose any regulatory approval that may have been obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business.

C. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

As of December 31, 2019, we had three subsidiaries. The following table sets out for each of our principal subsidiaries, the country of incorporation, and percentage ownership and voting interest held by us (directly or indirectly through subsidiaries).

|  |  |  | Percentage ownership |  |
Company |  | Country of incorporation |  | and voting interest |  | Main activity
argenx BV |  | Belgium |  | 100.00 | % | Biotechnical research on drugs and pharma processes
argenx US, Inc. |  | United States |  | 100.00 | % | Pharmaceuticals and pharmacy supplies merchant wholesalers
argenx Japan KK |  | Japan |  | 100.00 | % | Pharmaceuticals and pharmacy supplies merchant wholesalers

128

Table of Contents

D. PROPERTY, PLANTS AND EQUIPMENT

We lease our operational offices and laboratory space, which consists of approximately 2,900 square meters, located in Zwijnaarde, Belgium. The lease for this facility expires in 2026. We also lease office space in Breda, the Netherlands, Boston, Massachusetts and Tokyo, Japan.

We have a total of four facilities worldwide owned or leased as of December 31, 2019, as set forth in the following table:

Facility location |  | Use | Approx. size (m 2) |  | Lease expiry
Zwijnaarde, Belgium (leased) |  | Operations and Laboratory Space | 2,900 |  | March 31 st, 2025
Breda, the Netherlands (leased) |  | Headquarters | 12 |  | July 31 st, 2020
Boston, Massachusetts (leased) |  | Office Space | 813 |  | August 31 st, 2025
Tokyo, Japan (leased) |  | Office Space | 50 |  | January 31, 2020

Environment, Health and Safety

Our research and development activities take place in our facilities in Zwijnaarde, Belgium. For these activities we have obtained the necessary environmental and biohazard permits from the responsible governments. See “Item 3.D.—Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Industry.”

ITEM 4A. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

Not applicable.

ITEM 5. OPERATING AND FINANCIAL REVIEW AND PROSPECTS

A. OPERATING RESULTS

Overview

Since our inception in 2008, we have focused most of our financial resources and efforts towards developing our SIMPLE AntibodyTM Platform and antibody engineering technologies, identifying potential product candidates, establishing process, development and manufacturing capabilities for our product candidates and advancing multiple discovery programs into the clinic. We have advanced six internally developed product candidates into clinical development—efgartigimod, cusatuzumab, ARGX-111, ARGX-109, ARGX-112 and ARGX-115 (ABBV-151) — three into the preclinical stage—ARGX-116, ARGX-117 and ARGX-118 —and currently have multiple programs in the discovery stages. Through December 31, 2019, we have raised an aggregate gross proceeds of €1,396 million, including (i) an aggregate of €46.0 million from the private placement of equity securities in 2008, 2009 and 2011, (ii) €41.8 million from our initial public offering on the Euronext Brussels in 2014, (iii) €46.0 million from the private placement of equity securities, primarily to U.S. based institutional investors, in 2016, (iv) $114.7 million (approximately €102.1 million) from our initial U.S. public offering on the Nasdaq Global Select Market in May 2017, (v) $265.5 million (approximately €225.6 million) from our second U.S public offering on the Nasdaq Global Select Market in December 2017, (vi) $300.6 million (approximately €255.7 million) from our third U.S public offering on the Nasdaq Global Select Market in September 2018, (vi) €176.7 million from the private placement of equity securities as part of the closing of the global collaboration and license agreement with Janssen in January 2019 and (viii) €502.2 million from a global offering in November 2019. In addition, as of December 31, 2019, we have received upfront payments, milestone payments and research and development service fees from our collaborators totaling €420.2 million and have received €26.9 million in grants and incentives from governmental bodies. As of December 31, 2019, we had cash, cash equivalents and current financial assets of €1,335.8 million.

129

Table of Contents

Since our inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. We do not currently have any approved products and have never generated any revenue from product sales. Our ability to generate revenue sufficient to achieve profitability will depend significantly upon the successful development and eventual commercialization of one or more of our product candidates, which may never occur. For the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2019, we incurred total comprehensive losses of €66.6 million and €163.0 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2019, we had accumulated losses of €332.6 million.

We expect our expenses to increase substantially in connection with our ongoing development activities related to our preclinical and clinical programs. In addition, we expect to continue to incur significant costs associated with operating as a public company in the United States. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:

| · |  | execute the Phase 3 clinical trials of efgartigimod in MG, in ITP and in PV;

| · |  | complete the Phase 2 clinical trials of efgartigimod in PV and launch a Phase 2 clinical trial in CIDP;

| · |  | complete the Phase 2 clinical trials of cusatuzumab in AML and high risk MDS;

| · |  | jointly develop and commercialize cusatuzumab with Janssen as per the collaboration agreement signed in December 2018;

| · |  | seek regulatory approvals for any product candidates that successfully complete clinical trials;

| · |  | potentially establish a sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure and scale‑up manufacturing capabilities to commercialize any product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval;

| · |  | continue the research and development of our other clinical‑ and preclinical‑stage product candidates and discovery stage programs;

| · |  | seek to enhance our technology platform and discover and develop additional product candidates;

| · |  | maintain, expand and protect our intellectual property portfolio, including litigation costs associated with defending against alleged patent infringement claims;

| · |  | add clinical, scientific, operational, financial and management information systems and personnel, including personnel to support our product development and potential future commercialization efforts; and

| · |  | experience any delays or encounter any issues any of the above, including failed studies, ambiguous trial results, safety issues or other regulatory challenges.

We expect that the costs of development and commercialization will also significantly increase due to the extended product development roadmap for cusatuzumab as part of our collaboration with Janssen. Although this collaboration agreement provides for a joint decision process to approve the development plan as well as the budget, we will not control the actual amounts spent within such approved budget and we cannot control or guarantee that these funds are spent in the most efficient way.

The spread of COVID-19 has impacted the global economy and may impact our operations, including the potential interruption of our clinical trial activities and our supply chain. For example, the COVID-19 outbreak may delay enrollment in our clinical trials due to prioritization of hospital resources toward the outbreak, and some patients may be unwilling to enroll in our trials or be unable to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services, which would delay our ability to conduct clinical trials or release clinical trial results. The spread of an infectious disease, including COVID-19, may also result in the

130

Table of Contents

inability of our suppliers to deliver clinical drug supplies on a timely basis or at all. In addition, hospitals may reduce staffing and reduce or postpone certain treatments in response to the spread of an infectious disease. Such events may result in a period of business disruption, and in reduced operations, or doctors and medical providers may be unwilling to participate in our clinical trials, any of which could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. The extent to which the recent global COVID-19 pandemic impacts our business will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including new information that may emerge concerning the severity of COVID-19 and the actions to contain or treat its impact, among others. Any significant infectious disease outbreak, including the COVID-19 pandemic, could result in a widespread health crisis that could adversely affect the economies and financial markets worldwide, resulting in an economic downturn that could impact our business, financial condition and results of operations, including our ability to obtain additional funding, if needed. We are proactively executing risk mitigation strategies to attenuate the impact of COVID-19 on us.

Information pertaining to the year ended December 31, 2017 was included in our annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2018 under Item 5, “Operating and Financial Review and Prospects,” which was filed with the SEC on March 26, 2019.

131

Table of Contents

Basis of Presentation

Revenue

The Company generates revenue from collaborations and strategic alliances. The Company applies a five-step model to determine when, how and at what amount revenue is to be recognized depending on whether certain criteria are met.

1.Identify the contracts

In its current arrangements, the Company is licensing its Intellectual Property, providing research and development services and in the future, selling its products to collaborative entities. Revenue is generated through these arrangements via upfront payments, milestone payments based on development criteria, research and development service fees and future sales-based milestones and sales-based royalties.

2. Identify performance obligations

The Company has determined that there is one single performance obligation for certain arrangements in its material ongoing license and collaboration arrangements, that being the transfer of a license combined with performance of research and development services.

This is because we consider that the performance obligations cannot be distinct in the context of the contract, as the license has no stand-alone value without the Company being further involved in the research and development collaboration and that there is interdependence between the license and the research and development services to be provided. We estimate that the Company’s activities during the collaboration are going to significantly add to Intellectual Property and thereby the value of the programs.

3. Determine the transaction price

The Company has analyzed the transaction prices of our material ongoing license and collaboration arrangements currently composed of upfront payments, milestone payments and research and development service fees being delivered. Any variable consideration, such as development milestone payments that are promised in exchange for development services or the license of IP, is only included in the transaction price as from the moment the achievement of the related milestone event is highly probable (usually at the time of achievement of the milestone event). At the end of each subsequent reporting period, the Company re-evaluates the probability of achievement of such milestones and any related constraint, and, if necessary, adjusts the estimate of the overall transaction price. Any such adjustments are recorded on a cumulative catch-up basis, which would affect revenue and earnings in the period of adjustment. The Company’s collaborators may be required to pay the Company sales-based milestone payments or royalties on future sales of commercial products. The Company recognizes revenues related to sales-based milestone and royalty payments upon the later to occur of (i) achievement of the collaborator’s underlying sales or (ii) satisfaction of any performance obligation(s) related to these sales, in each case assuming the license to the Company’s intellectual property is deemed to be the predominant item to which the sales-based milestones and/or royalties relate.

4. Allocate the transaction price

In principle, an entity shall allocate the transaction price to each performance obligation identified in the contract on a relative stand-alone selling price. However, the transaction price of certain of our arrangements is allocated to a single performance obligation since the transfer of a license is considered to be combined with the performance of research and development services.

Therefore, research and development milestone payments are variable considerations that are entirely allocated to the single performance obligation.

132

Table of Contents

5. Recognize revenue

Revenue from certain arrangements is recognized over time as the Company satisfies a single performance obligation. Our collaborative partner entities simultaneously receive the benefits provided by the Company’s performance as the Company performs.

The Company recognizes upfront payments and milestone payments, allocated to a single performance obligation over the estimated service period based on a pattern that reflects the transfer of the services. The revenues recognized reflect the level of service during each period. In this case, the Company would use an input model that considers estimates of the percentage of total research and development service costs that are completed each period compared to the total estimated services costs (percentage of completion method).

Research and development service fees are recognized as revenue when costs are incurred and agreed by the parties, as the Group is acting as a principal in the scope of its stake of the research and development activities of its ongoing license and collaboration agreements.

Other Operating Income

As a company that carries extensive research and development activities, we benefit from various grants, research and development incentives and payroll tax rebates from certain governmental agencies. These grants and research and development incentives generally aim to partly reimburse approved expenditures incurred in our research and development efforts. The primary grants, research and development incentives and payroll tax rebates are as follows:

Government Grants

| · |  | We have received several grants from agencies of the Flemish government to support various research programs focused on technological innovation in Flanders. These grants require us to maintain a presence in the Flemish region for a number of years and invest according to pre agreed budgets.

Research and Development Incentives

| · |  | Companies in Belgium can benefit from tax savings on amounts spent on research and development by applying a one time or periodic tax deduction on research and development expenditures for the acquisition or development of patents. This tax credit is a reduction of the corporate income taxes for Belgian statutory purposes and is transferrable to the next four accounting periods. These tax credits are paid to us in cash after five years to the extent they have not been offset against corporate taxes due.

Payroll Tax Rebates

| · |  | We also benefit from certain rebates on payroll withholding taxes for scientific personnel. The government grants and research and development incentives generally aim to partly reimburse approved expenditures incurred in our research and development efforts and are credited to the income statement, under other operating income, when the relevant expenditure has been incurred and there is reasonable assurance that the grant or research and development incentive is receivable.

133

Table of Contents

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses consist principally of:

| · |  | personnel expense related to compensation of research and development staff and related expenses, including salaries, benefits and share‑based compensation expenses;

| · |  | external research and development expenses related to (i) chemistry, manufacturing and control costs for our product candidates, both for preclinical and clinical testing, all of which is conducted by specialized contract manufacturers, (ii) fees and other costs paid to contract research organizations in connection with preclinical testing and the performance of clinical trials for our product candidates and (iii) costs associated with regulatory submissions and approvals, quality assurance and pharmacovigilance;

| · |  | materials and consumables expenses;

| · |  | depreciation and amortization of tangible and intangible fixed assets used to develop our product candidates; and

| · |  | other expenses consisting of (i) costs associated with obtaining and maintaining patents and other intellectual property and (ii) other costs such as travel expenses related to research and development activities.

We incur various external expenses under our collaboration agreements for material and services consumed in the discovery and development of our partnered product candidates. Under our agreements with Shire, LEO Pharma and Staten, our collaboration partner reimburses us for part or all of these external expenses and compensates us for time spent on the project by our employees. Under our agreement with AbbVie, our own research and development expenses are not reimbursed. Research and development expenses are recognized in the period in which they are incurred. Under our agreement with Janssen, we assume certain development obligations, and are jointly responsible with Janssen for all research, development and regulatory costs relating to the product.

Our research and development expenses may vary substantially from period to period based on the timing of our research and development activities, including the timing of the initiation of clinical trials, production of product batches and enrolment of patients in clinical trials. Research and development expenses are expected to increase as we advance the clinical development of efgartigimod and cusatuzumab and further advance the research and development of our other preclinical and discovery stage programs. The successful development of our product candidates is highly uncertain. At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate the nature, timing and estimated costs of the efforts that will be necessary to complete the development of, or the period, if any, in which material net cash inflows may commence from, any of our product candidates. This is due to numerous risks and uncertainties associated with developing drugs, as fully described in “Item 3.D.—Risk Factors,” and including the uncertainty of:

| · |  | the scope, rate of progress and expense of our research and development activities;

| · |  | the successful enrollment in, and completion of clinical trials;

| · |  | the ability to market, commercialize and achieve market acceptance for efgartigimod, cusatuzumab or any other product candidate that we may develop in the future, if approved;

| · |  | establishing and maintaining a continued acceptable safety profile for our product candidates;

| · |  | the terms, timing and receipt of regulatory approvals from applicable regulatory authorities;

134

Table of Contents

| · |  | the successful completion of preclinical studies necessary to support IND applications in the United States or similar applications in other countries;

| · |  | the expense of filing, prosecuting, defending and enforcing patent claims and other intellectual property rights; and

| · |  | our current and future collaborators continuing their collaborations with us.

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses

Selling, general and administrative expenses consist primarily of (i) personnel expenses relating to salaries and related costs for personnel, including share‑based compensation, of our employees in executive, finance, business development, commercial and support functions, (ii) consulting fees relating to professional fees for accounting, business development, IT, audit, commercial, legal services and investor relations costs, (iii) board expenses consisting of directors’ fees, travel expenses and share‑based compensation for non‑executive board members, (iv) allocated facilities costs and (v) other selling, general and administrative expenses, including leasing costs, office expenses, travel costs.

We expect our general and administrative expenses to increase as we continue to support our growth and operate as a public company in the United States. Such costs include increases in our finance and legal personnel, additional external legal and audit fees, and expenses and costs associated with compliance with the regulations governing public companies. We expect our selling expenses to increase significantly with preparatory marketing and market access activities with respect to the potential future commercialization of one or more of our product candidates, if approved.

Changes in fair value on financial assets

The Company entered into a license agreement with AgomAb Therapeutics NV for the use of HGF-mimetic SIMPLE Antibodies™, developed under the Company’s Innovative Access Program. In exchange for granting this license, the Company received a profit share in AgomAb Therapeutics NV. The profit share has been designated as a non-current financial asset held at fair value through profit or loss. As a result, any change in fair value of the profit sharing instrument results in a fair value gain on financial assets at fair value through profit or loss.

Financial Income (Expense)

Financial income reflects interest earned on the financial investments of our cash and cash equivalents and financial assets. Financial expense corresponds to interest expenses.

Exchange Gains (Losses)

Our exchange gains (losses) relate to (i) our transactions denominated in foreign currencies, mainly in U.S. dollars, Swiss francs, British pounds and Japanese yens, which generate exchange gains or losses and (ii) the translation at the reporting date of assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies into euros, which is our functional and presentation currency. For more information on currency exchange fluctuations on our business, please see “Item 11—Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk—Foreign Exchange Risk.” We have no derivative financial instruments to hedge interest rate and foreign currency risk.

Income Tax

We have a history of losses. We expect to continue incurring losses as we continue to invest in our clinical and pre‑clinical development programs and our discovery platform, and as we prepare for the potential future commercial launch of one or more of our product candidates, if approved. Consequently, we do not have any deferred tax asset on our consolidated statement of financial position.

135

Table of Contents

We are incurring income tax expense on the profit generated in argenx US, Inc and argenx Japan K.K. in view of the transfer price agreements set up between argenx BV and argenx US, Inc. and between argenx BV and argenx Japan K.K.

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments and Estimates

In the application of our accounting policies, we are required to make judgments, estimates and assumptions about the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. The estimates and associated assumptions are based on historical experience and other factors that are considered to be relevant. Actual results may differ from these estimates.

The estimates and underlying assumptions are reviewed on an ongoing basis. Revisions to accounting estimates are recognized in the period in which the estimate is revised if the revision affects only that period or in the period of the revision and future periods if the revision affects both current and future periods.

The following elements are areas where key assumptions concerning the future, and other key sources of estimation uncertainty at the end of the reporting period, have a significant risk of causing a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities within the next financial year.

Critical Judgements in Applying Accounting Policies

Revenue Recognition

Revenue from certain arrangements is recognized as the Company satisfies a single performance obligation. The Company recognizes upfront payments and milestone payments, allocated to a single performance obligation over the estimated service period based on a pattern that reflects the transfer of the services. The revenue recognized would reflect the level of service during each period. In this case, the Company would use an input model that considers estimates of the percentage of total research and development service costs that are completed each period compared to the total estimated service costs (percentage of completion method). Research and development service fees are recognized as revenue when costs are incurred and agreed by the parties, as the Company is acting as a principal in the scope of its stake in the research and development activities of its ongoing license and collaboration agreements.

Research and Development Cost Accruals

Research and development costs are charged to expense as incurred and are typically made up of payroll costs, clinical and preclinical activities, drug development and manufacturing costs, including costs for clinical research organizations and investigative sites. Costs for certain development activities, such as clinical trials, are recognized based on an evaluation of the progress to completion of specific tasks using data such as information provided by vendors on their actual costs incurred. Payments for these activities are based on the terms of the individual arrangements, which may differ from the pattern of costs incurred, and are reflected in the financial statements as prepaid expenses.

136

Table of Contents

Results of Operation

Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2019 and 2018

|  | Year ended
|  | December 31,
|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | % Change
|  |  | (In thousands) |  |  |
Revenue |  | € | 69,783 |  | € | 21,482 |  | 225 | %
Other operating income |  |  | 12,801 |  |  | 7,749 |  | 65 | %
Total operating income |  |  | 82,584 |  |  | 29,231 |  | 183 | %
Research and development expenses |  |  | (197,665) |  |  | (83,609) |  | 136 | %
Selling, general and administrative expenses |  |  | (64,569) |  |  | (27,471) |  | 135 | %
Fair value gains on financial assets at fair value through profit or loss |  |  | 1,096 |  |  | — |  | — | %
Operating loss |  |  | (178,554) |  |  | (81,849) |  | 118 | %
Financial income |  |  | 14,399 |  |  | 3,694 |  | 290 | %
Financial expense |  |  | (124) |  |  | — |  | — | %
Exchange gains (losses) |  |  | 6,066 |  |  | 12,308 |  | (51) | %
Loss before taxes |  | € | (158,213) |  | € | (65,847) |  | 140 | %
Income tax expense |  |  | (4,752) |  |  | (794) |  | 499 | %
Loss for the period and total comprehensive loss |  | € | (162,965) |  | € | (66,641) |  | 145 | %
Weighted average number of shares outstanding |  |  | 38,619,121 |  |  | 33,419,356 |  |  |
Basic and diluted loss per share (in €) |  |  | (4.22) |  |  | (1.99) |  |  |

Revenue

|  | Year ended
|  | December 31,
|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | % Change
|  |  | (In thousands) |  |  |
Upfront payments |  | € | 22,360 |  | € | 8,635 |  | 159 | %
Milestone payments |  |  | 28,085 |  |  | 11,440 |  | 145 | %
Research and development service fees |  |  | 19,338 |  |  | 1,407 |  | 1,275 | %
Total |  | € | 69,783 |  | € | 21,482 |  | 225 | %

Our revenue increased by €48.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019 to €69.8 million, compared to €21.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2018.

The increase of €13.7 million in upfront payments for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to the year ended December 31, 2018, was primarily primarily related to the partial recognition of the upfront payment received under the collaboration and license agreement for cusatuzumab with Janssen.

The increase of €16.6 million in milestone payments recognized for the year ended December 31, 2019 com-pared to the year ended December 31, 2018 was primarily due to related to the recognition of the milestone payment following the initiation of a first-in-human clinical trial with ABBV-151 (formerly named ARGX-115) under the AbbVie collaboration.

As of January 1, 2018, upon the adoption of IFRS 15, both the upfront payments and milestone payments are recognized as revenue over the estimated period of the Company’s continuing involvement in the research and development activities provided for under the terms of these agreements.

The increase of €17.9 million in research and development service fees for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to the year ended December 31, 2018, is primarily primarily related to the recognition of research and development service fees under the collaboration and license agreement for cusatuzumab with Janssen.

137

Table of Contents

Other Operating Income

|  | Year ended
|  | December 31,
|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | % Change
|  |  | (In thousands)
Government grants |  | € | 2,289 |  | € | 1,842 |  | 24 | %
Research and development incentives |  |  | 4,818 |  |  | 2,151 |  | 124 | %
Payroll tax rebates |  |  | 5,694 |  |  | 3,756 |  | 52 | %
Total |  | € | 12,801 |  | € | 7,749 |  | 65 | %

Other operating income increased by €5.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2019 to €12.8 million, compared to €7.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. For the year ended December 31, 2019, we accrued research and development incentives income of €4.8 million, compared to €2.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2018, corresponding to Belgian research and development incentives with regard to incurred research and development expenses, which will be paid to us in cash after a five‑year period, if not offset against the taxable basis over the respective period. The increase in research and development incentives income is due to an overall increase in research and development expenses incurred in 2019. We accounted for €5.7 million of payroll tax rebates in the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to €3.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2018, for employing certain research and development personnel. The increase in payroll tax rebates results directly from an increase in the number of employees employed in our research and development functions.

For more information regarding governmental policies that could affect our operations, see “Item 4.B.—Business Overview—Government Regulation.”

Research and Development Expenses

|  | Year ended
|  | December 31,
|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | % Change
|  |  | (In thousands)
Personnel expense |  | € | 45,733 |  | € | 26,519 |  | 72 | %
External research and development expenses |  |  | 137,050 |  |  | 48,859 |  | 181 | %
Materials and consumables |  |  | 2,027 |  |  | 1,464 |  | 38 | %
Depreciation and amortization |  |  | 1,641 |  |  | 494 |  | 232 | %
Other expenses |  |  | 11,214 |  |  | 6,273 |  | 79 | %
Total |  | € | 197,665 |  | € | 83,609 |  | 136 | %

Our research and development expenses totaled €197.7 million and 83.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018 respectively. The increase of €114.1 million compared to 2018 primarily results from an increase in external research and development expenses and personnel expenses. The increase of €19.2 million in personnel expense for the year ended December 31, 2019 corresponded principally to (i) an increase of €8.5 million for share-based compensation expenses related to the grant of stock options to our research and development employees and (ii) increased costs associated with additional research and development personnel. We employed 118 employees in our research and development functions on December 31, 2019, compared to 75 employees on December 31, 2018.

138

Table of Contents

Our external research and development expenses for the year ended December 31, 2019 totaled €137.1 million, compared to €48.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase reflects higher clinical trial costs and manufacturing expenses related to the development of our product candidate portfolio. The table below provides additional detail on our external research and development expenses by program:

|  | Year ended
|  | December 31,
|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | % Change
|  |  | (In thousands)
efgartigimod |  | € | 84,180 |  | € | 30,944 |  | 172 | %
cusatuzumab |  |  | 38,692 |  |  | 9,289 |  | 317 | %
Other programs |  |  | 14,178 |  |  | 8,626 |  | 64 | %
Total |  | € | 137,050 |  | € | 48,859 |  | 180 | %

External research and development expenses for our lead product candidate efgartigimod totaled €84.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to €30.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. This increase of €53.3 million of external research and development expenses corresponds primarily to increased manufacturing and clinical development activities in relation to the execution of two Phase 3 clinical trials in MG and the preparation for and initiation of two Phase 2 clinical trials in CIDP and two Phase 3 clinical trials in ITP.

External research and development expenses for cusatuzumab totaled €38.7 million for the year ended on December 31, 2019 compared to €9.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. This increase of €29.4 million resulted primarily from the initiation of a Phase 2 trial in up to 150 newly diagnosed “unfit” AML patients who are not eligible for intensive chemotherapy, as part of the collaboration and license agreement with Janssen.

External research and development expenses on other programs increased by €5.6 million to €14.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to €8.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase is primarily due to increased research and development expenses in relation to the advancement of our program with ARGX-117, a complement-targeting antibody against C2.

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses

|  | Year ended
|  | December 31,
|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | % Change
|  |  | (In thousands)
Personnel expense |  | € | 40,082 |  | € | 18,292 |  | 119 | %
Consulting fees |  |  | 5,624 |  |  | 3,646 |  | 54 | %
Marketing costs |  |  | 10,719 |  |  | 1,826 |  | 487 | %
Supervisory board |  |  | 2,792 |  |  | 1,088 |  | 157 | %
Office costs |  |  | 5,352 |  |  | 2,619 |  | 104 | %
Total |  | € | 64,569 |  | € | 27,471 |  | 135 | %

Our selling, general and administrative expenses totaled €64.6 million and €27.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018 respectively. The increase in our selling, general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2019 was principally due to an increase of personnel expense, resulting from (i) increased costs of the share-based payment compensation plans related to the grant of stock options to our selling, general and administrative employees and (ii) increased costs associated with additional employees recruited to strengthen our selling, general and administrative activities, notably in preparation of the potential commercial launch of efgartigimod in the U.S.

On December 31, 2019, we employed 70 employees in our selling, general and administrative functions, compared to 30 employees on December 31, 2018.

139

Table of Contents

Financial Income (Expense)

For the year ended December 31, 2019, financial income amounted to €14.4 million compared to €3.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase of €10.7 million in 2019 related primarily to an increase in the interest received on our cash, cash equivalents and current financial assets.

Exchange Gains (Losses)

Exchange gains totaled €6.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase was mainly attributable to unrealized exchange rate gains on our cash and current financial assets position in U.S. dollars due to the favorable fluctuation of the EUR/USD exchange rate in 2019.

B. LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

Sources of Funds

Since our inception in 2008, we have invested most of our resources to developing our product candidates, building our intellectual property portfolio, developing our supply chain, conducting business planning, raising capital and providing general and administrative support for these operations. We do not currently have any approved products and have never generated any revenue from product sales. To date, we have funded our operations through public and private placements of equity securities, upfront, milestone and expense reimbursement payments received from our collaborators, funding from governmental bodies and interest income from the investment of our cash, cash equivalents and financial assets. Through December 31, 2019, we have raised gross proceeds of €1,396 million from private and public offerings of equity securities, received €420.2 million in revenue from our collaborators, and €26.9 million in grants and incentives from governmental bodies.

Our cash flows may fluctuate and are difficult to forecast and will depend on many factors. On December 31, 2019, we had cash, cash equivalents and current financial assets of €1,335.8 million, compared to €564.6 million on December 31, 2018.

We have no ongoing material financing commitments, such as lines of credit or guarantees, that are expected to affect our liquidity over the next five years, other than leases and our (significant) commitments to Lonza which are detailed in note 30 of our consolidated financial statements for the period ending December 31, 2019.

For more information as to the risks associated with our future funding needs, see the section of this annual report titled “Item 3.D.—Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital.”

For more information as to our financial instruments, please see “Note 27—Financial instruments and financial risk management—Overview of financial instruments” in our consolidated financial statements which are appended to our annual report for the period ended December 31, 2019 and which are incorporated herein by reference.

140

Table of Contents

Cash Flows

Comparison for the Years Ended December 31, 2019 and 2018

The table below summarizes our cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018.

|  | Year ended
|  | December 31,
|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | Variance
|  | (In thousands)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of the period |  | € | 281,040 |  | € | 190,867 |  | € | 90,173
Net cash flows (used in) / from operating activities |  |  | 134,584 |  |  | (53,839) |  |  | 188,423
Net cash flows (used in) / from investing activities |  |  | (744,338) |  |  | (107,542) |  |  | (636,796)
Net cash flows (used in) / from financing activities |  |  | 659,359 |  |  | 244,671 |  |  | 414,688
Effect of exchange rate differences on cash and cash equivalents |  |  | 637 |  |  | 6,883 |  |  | (6,246)
Cash and cash equivalents at end of the period |  | € | 331,282 |  | € | 281,040 |  | € | 50,242

Net Cash Used in Operating Activities

Net cash outflow from our operating activities decreased by €188.5 million to a net inflow of €134.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to a net outflow of €53.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The net cash inflow from operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2019 resulted primarily from the closing of the exclusive global collaboration and license agreement for cusatuzumab with Janssen, which triggered a $300 million upfront payment, partially reduced by research and development expenses incurred in relation to the manufacturing and clinical development activities of efgartigimod, cusatuzumab and the advancement of other preclinical and discovery-stage product candidates.

Net Cash Used in Investing Activities

Investing activities consist primarily of the acquisition of current financial assets, purchase of laboratory equipment and interest received from the placements of our cash and cash equivalents and current financial assets. Cash flow used in investing activities represented a net outflow of €744.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to a net outflow of €107.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The net outflow for the year ended December 31, 2019 related primarily to (i) the investment of €708.1 million in current financial assets, including money market funds and U.S. term deposit accounts (compared to €114.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2018), (ii) €39.9 million as result of the in-licensing of the ENHANZE® drug delivery technology from Halozyme and (iii) €5.5 million interest received from the placement of our cash, cash equivalents and current financial assets (compared to €3.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2018).

Net Cash Provided by Financing Activities

Financing activities consist of net proceeds from our private placements and public offerings of our securities and exercise of stock options. The net cash inflow from financing activities was €659.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to a net cash inflow of €244.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The net cash inflow for the year ended December 31, 2019 was attributed to (i) €479.2 million net cash proceeds from our global offering in November 2019, (compared to €241.1 million net cash proceeds from our U.S. follow-on public offering of ADSs in September 2018), (ii) €176.7 million from a private placement following the closing of the exclusive global collaboration and license agreement for cusatuzumab with Janssen in January 2019 and (iii) €4.8 million proceeds received from the exercise of stock options in 2019 (compared to €2.3 million for the year ended December 2018).

141

Table of Contents

Operating and Capital Expenditure Requirements

We have never achieved profitability and, as of December 31, 2019, we had accumulated losses of €332.6 million. We expect to continue to incur significant operating losses for the foreseeable future as we continue our research and development efforts and seek to obtain regulatory approval and commercialization of our product candidates.

On the basis of current assumptions, we expect that our existing cash and cash equivalents and current financial assets will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements through at least the next 12 months. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with the development of efgartigimod, cusatuzumab and our other product candidates and discovery stage programs and because the extent to which we may enter into collaborations with third parties for the development of these product candidates is unknown, we are unable to estimate the amounts of increased capital outlays and operating expenses associated with completing the research and development of our product candidates. Our future capital requirements for efgartigimod, cusatuzumab and our other product candidates and discovery stage programs will depend on many factors, including:

| · |  | the progress, timing and completion of preclinical testing and clinical trials for our current or any future product candidates;

| · |  | the number of potential new product candidates we identify and decide to develop;

| · |  | the time and costs involved in obtaining regulatory approval for our product candidates and any delays we may encounter as a result of evolving regulatory requirements or adverse results with respect to any of our product candidates;

| · |  | selling and marketing activities undertaken in connection with the potential commercialization of our current or any future product candidates, if approved, and costs involved in the creation of an effective sales and marketing organization;

| · |  | the costs involved in growing our organization to the size needed to allow for the research, development and potential commercialization of our current or any future product candidates;

| · |  | the costs involved in filing patent applications and maintaining and enforcing patents or defending against claims or infringements raised by third parties;

| · |  | the maintenance of our existing collaboration agreements and entry into new collaboration agreements; and

| · |  | the amount of revenues, if any, we may derive either directly or in the form of royalty payments from future sales of our product candidates, if approved; and

| · |  | developments related to COVID-19 and its impact on the costs and timing associated with the conduct of our clinical trials, preclinical programs and other related activities.

For more information as to the risks associated with our future funding needs, see the section of this annual report titled “Item 3.D.—Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital.”

C. RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, PATENTS AND LICENSES

For a discussion of our research and development activities, see the sections of this annual report titled “Item 4.B.—Business Overview” and “Item 5.A.—Operating Results.”

142

Table of Contents

D. TREND INFORMATION

Other than as disclosed elsewhere in this annual report, we are not aware of any trends, uncertainties, demands, commitments or events for the period from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019 that are reasonably likely to have a material effect on our net revenues, income, profitability, liquidity or capital resources, or that caused the disclosed financial information to be not necessarily indicative of future operating results or financial conditions. For a discussion of trends, see the sections of this annual report titled “Item 4.B.—Business Overview,” “Item 5.A.—Operating Results”, and “Item 5.B.—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

E. OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS

We did not have during the periods presented, and we do not currently have, any off‑balance sheet arrangements, as defined in the rules and regulations of the SEC, such as relationships with unconsolidated entities or financial partnerships, which are often referred to as structured finance or special purpose entities, established for the purpose of facilitating financing transactions that are not required to be reflected on our balance sheets.

F. TABULAR DISCLOSURE OF CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS

The table below summarizes our contractual obligations at December 31, 2019.

|  | Payments due by period
|  |  |  |  | Less than |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | More than
|  | Total |  | 1 year |  | 1–3 years |  | 3–5 years |  | 5 years
|  | (In thousands)
Lease liabilities |  | € | 7,025 |  | € | 2,205 |  | € | 3,137 |  | € | 1,251 |  | € | 432
Purchase obligations |  | € | 91,409 |  | € | 52,032 |  | € | 32,790 |  | € | 4,001 |  | € | 2,586

We signed a lease agreement effective April 2016 for laboratory and office space in Zwijnaarde, Belgium. This lease agreement is for a period of nine years starting from April 1, 2016, with the possibility to terminate the lease by giving a notice of at least 12 months in advance at the occasion of the third and sixth anniversary of the agreement. Our operating lease commitments include a lease plan for company cars with maturity dates up to four years.

For our offices in the Netherlands, Boston, Massachusetts and Tokyo, Japan, we have a lease agreement renewable on an annual basis. For our office in Boston, Massachusetts, we have a lease agreement renewable on an annual basis.

The purchase obligation described above relates to contractual obligations with our manufacturing contractor, Lonza Sales AG.

The commitment amounts in the table above are associated with contracts that are enforceable and legally binding and that specify all significant terms, including fixed or minimum services to be used, fixed, minimum or variable price provisions and the approximate timing of the actions under the contracts. The table does not include obligations under agreements that we can cancel without a significant penalty.

We have received various governmental grants that may need to be repaid if certain conditions related to these grants are not met. We believe that it is uncertain whether we will be required to repay these grants and, accordingly, have not included them in the table above.

Our manufacturing commitments with our drug substance manufacturing contractor Lonza relate to the ongoing execution of the BLA services for efgartigimod and the ongoing manufacturing activities related to the start-up of Lonza Singapore as a potential future commercial manufacturing site. In December 2018, we signed our first commercial supply agreement with Lonza related to the reservation of commercial drug substance supply capacity for efgartigimod. The total commitment under this commercial supply agreement amounts to a minimum

143

Table of Contents

commitment of £25.3 million over a period of five years starting from 2020. In the aggregate, we have outstanding commitments for efgartigimod of approximately €53.4 million. In addition to the obligations for efgartigimod, we also have contractual obligations for cusatuzumab of approximately €34.4 million and for ARGX-117 of approximately €3.6 million.

G. SAFE HARBOR

This annual report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act and as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. See “Cautionary Statement with Respect to Forward Looking Statements” at the beginning of this annual report.

ITEM 6. DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEES

A. DIRECTORS AND SENIOR MANAGEMENT

Our Board of Directors

We have a one‑tier board structure consisting of an executive director who is responsible for our day‑to‑day management and non‑executive directors who are responsible for the supervision of the executive directors. Our executive directors and our non‑executive directors are collectively responsible for our general affairs. We may be represented by our board of directors or by two executive directors acting jointly. Our board of directors is currently comprised of one executive director and seven non‑executive directors, who we refer to individually as a director. Less than a majority of the directors of our board of directors are citizens or residents of the United States.

The following table sets forth certain information with respect to the current members of our board of directors, including their ages as of December 31, 2019:

Name |  | Age |  | Position |  | Nationality |  | Date of appointment |  | Term expiration
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 48 |  | Executive Director (Chief Executive Officer) |  | BE |  | May 8, 2018 |  | 2022
Peter K.M. Verhaeghe |  | 61 |  | Non‑Executive Director (chairperson) |  | BE |  | May 8, 2018 |  | 2022
David L. Lacey |  | 67 |  | Non‑Executive Director |  | US |  | May 8, 2018 |  | 2022
Werner Lanthaler |  | 51 |  | Non‑Executive Director (vice chairperson) |  | AT |  | May 8, 2018 |  | 2022
J. Donald deBethizy |  | 69 |  | Non‑Executive Director |  | US |  | May 13, 2015 |  | 2023
Pamela Klein |  | 58 |  | Non‑Executive Director |  | US |  | April 28, 2016 |  | 2020
A.A. Rosenberg |  | 67 |  | Non‑Executive Director |  | UK |  | April 26, 2017 |  | 2021
James M. Daly |  | 58 |  | Non-Executive Director |  | US |  | May 8, 2018 |  | 2022

The address for our directors is our registered office, Willemstraat 5, 4811 AH, Breda, the Netherlands.

Pamela Klein is expected to be nominated for re-appointment at the General Meeting to be held in 2020.

Our board of directors has determined that all of the non‑executive members of the board of directors are independent under the Nasdaq’s listing requirements and that all of the non‑executive members of the board of directors are independent under the Dutch Corporate Governance Code, or DCGC.

144

Table of Contents

The following is the biographical information of the members of our board of directors:

Tim Van Hauwermeiren co‑founded our company in 2008 and has served as our Chief Executive Officer since July 2008. He has served as a member of our board of directors since July 2014. Mr. Van Hauwermeiren has more than 20 years of general management and business development experience across the life sciences and consumer goods sectors. Mr. Van Hauwermeiren holds a B.Sc. and M.Sc. in bioengineering from Ghent University (Belgium) and an Executive MBA from The Vlerick School of Management.

Peter K.M. Verhaeghe has served as a member and chairperson of our board of directors since July 2014. Mr. Verhaeghe is the managing partner of VVGB Advocaten—Avocats, a corporate finance law and tax law firm, a position he has held since July 1999. He is currently lead counsel to a number of Belgian, Dutch and Swiss biotechnology and diagnostics companies. Mr. Verhaeghe served as the president of the board of directors of Merisant France SAS, as a member of the management board of Merisant Company 2 sàrl and as a member of the board of directors of CzechPak Manufacturing s.r.o. He previously served as the chairman of the board of directors of PharmaNeuroBoost NV from December 2006 to January 2013 and as liquidator in charge of KBC Private Equity Fund Biotech NV from April 2009 to December 2012. Mr. Verhaeghe serves on the Board of Directors of Participatiemaatschappii Vlaanderen (PMV) NV and as Chairman of the Board of Haretis SA (Luxembourg) since March 2011. Mr. Verhaeghe holds a degree in law from the University of Leuven and an LLM degree from Harvard Law School.

Dr. David L. Lacey has served as a member of our board of directors since July 2014. Dr. Lacey is a biopharmaceutical consultant at David L. Lacey LLC, where he advises academic institutions, biotechnology companies and venture capital firms, a position he has held since July 2011. He currently serves as a director of Inbiomotion SL, Atreca, Inc. and Nurix, Inc. From 1994 until his retirement in 2011, he held various positions, including head of discovery research, at Amgen Inc., where he played a fundamental scientific role in the discovery of the OPG/RANKL/RANK pathway, which led to the development of the anti‑RANKL human mAb denosumab, for both osteoporosis (Prolia) and cancer‑related bone diseases (XGEVA). He holds a Bachelor’s degree in biology and an M.D. from the University of Colorado, and has his board certification in anatomic pathology.

Dr. Werner Lanthaler has served as a member of our board of directors since July 2014. Dr. Lanthaler is the chief executive officer of Evotec AG, a global drug discovery research organization, a position he has held since March 2009. Dr. Lanthaler previously served on the supervisory boards of Bioxell SpA and Pantec Biosolutions AG. Dr. Lanthaler holds a degree in psychology, a Ph.D. in business administration from Vienna University of Economics and Business and a Master’s degree in public administration from Harvard University.

Dr. J. Donald deBethizy has served as a member of our board of directors since May 2015. Dr. deBethizy has 30 years of experience in research and development and financial, business and operating management and board work in the biotechnology and consumer products industry. He is the president of White City Consulting ApS. Previously, Dr. deBethizy served as president and chief executive officer of Santaris Pharma A/S until October 2014, when the company was sold to Roche. From August 2000 to June 2012, Dr. deBethizy was co‑founder and chief executive officer of Targacept, Inc., a U.S. biotechnology company listed on Nasdaq. He currently serves on the supervisory boards of Albumedix A/S, Newron Pharmaceuticals SpA, Noxxon Pharma NV and AG, Rigontec GmbH and Proterris, Inc. From May 2013 to November 2014, he served as executive chairman of Contera Pharma ApS, and from July 2015 to November 2017, he served as chairman of Rigotec GmbH. He previously served on the boards of Asceneuron SA, Serendex Pharmaceuticals A/S, Enbiotix Inc., Targacept Inc. and Biosource Inc. Mr. deBethizy has held adjunct appointments at Wake Forest University Babcock School of Management, Wake Forest University School of Medicine and Duke University. Dr. deBethizy holds a B.Sc. in biology from the University of Maryland, and an M.Sc. and a Ph.D. in toxicology from Utah State University.

Dr. Pamela Klein has served as a member of our board of directors since April 2016. Dr. Klein is a principal and founder of PMK BioResearch, which offers strategic consulting in oncology drug development to corporate boards, management teams and the investment community, a position she has held since 2008. She currently serves as a member of various scientific advisor boards. Previously, Dr. Klein spent seven years at the National Cancer Institute as Research Director of the NCI‑Navy Breast Center, after which she joined Genentech

145

Table of Contents

and was VP, Development until 2001. She served as Chief Medical Officer for Intellikine which was acquired by Takeda. She was previously Vice President, Development for Genentech. Dr. Klein holds a Bachelor’s degree in biology from California State University and an M.D. from Stritch School of Medicine, Loyola University Chicago and is trained in internal medicine and medical oncology.

Msc. A.A. Rosenberg has served as a member of our board of directors since April 2017. He currently serves as CEO of TR Advisory Services GmbH, a consultancy firm advising on business development, licensing and mergers and acquisitions. Mr. Rosenberg has also been a Managing Director of MPM Capital, a venture capital firm, since April 2015. From January 2013 until February 2015, he served as Corporate Head of M&A and Licensing at Novartis Pharma. He served as Global Head of Business Development and Licensing at Novartis Pharma from March 2005 to December 2012. Msc. A.A. Rosenberg holds non‑executive board memberships in Radius Health Inc., TriNetX, Inc., iOmx Therapeutics AG, Cullinan Oncology Inc. and Oculis SA. Msc. A.A. Rosenberg has a B.Sc. (Hons) from the University of Leicester and a M.Sc. Physiology from the University of London.

James M. Daly has served as a member of our board of directors since May 2018. He holds a Bachelor in Science and a Master in Business Administration from the State of New York University. He joined GlaxoSmithKline in 1985 where he held various positions, including Sr. Vice President – Respiratory Division with full responsibility for sales, marketing and medical affairs. He moved to Amgen in 2002 where he was Sr. Vice President for the North America Commercial Operations 2011. In 2012 he joined Incyte, a publicly traded company focused on oncology and inflammation, where he was chief commercial officer until June 2015. James Michael Daly currently serves as a director of Chimerix Inc, Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Coherus Biosciences, Halozyme Therapeutics and Bellicum Pharmaceuticals, all Nasdaq-listed companies.

Our Executive Management

The following table sets forth certain information with respect to the current members of our executive management, including their ages as of December 31, 2019:

Name |  | Age |  | Position |  | Nationality |  | Date of appointment
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 48 |  | Chief Executive Officer and Executive Director |  | BE |  | July 15, 2008
Eric Castaldi |  | 55 |  | Chief Financial Officer |  | F |  | April 1, 2014
Keith Woods |  | 52 |  | Chief Operating Officer |  | US |  | April 5, 2018
Wim Parys |  | 60 |  | Chief Medical Officer |  | BE |  | July 1, 2019
Hans de Haard |  | 60 |  | Chief Scientific Officer |  | NL |  | July 1, 2008
Arjen Lemmen |  | 35 |  | VP Corporate Development & Strategy |  | NL |  | June 1, 2019
Dirk Beeusaert |  | 56 |  | General Counsel |  | BE |  | April 1, 2017

The address for our executive management is Industriepark Zwijnaarde 7, Building C, 9052 Zwijnaarde (Ghent), Belgium.

The following is a brief summary of the biographical information of those members of our executive management who do not also serve on our board of directors:

Eric Castaldi has served as our Chief Financial Officer since April 2014 and served as a member of our board of directors from July 2014 to April 26, 2017. Mr. Castaldi has 28 years of international financial executive management experience, including 19 years in the biopharmaceutical industry. From 1998 to 2014, Mr. Castaldi served as chief financial officer and a member of the executive committee of Nicox SA, a Euronext‑listed biotechnology company. From 2008 to 2012, he served as a member of the board of directors and as chairman of the audit committee of Hybrigenics Services SAS, a Euronext‑listed French biopharmaceutical company specializing in oncology. Mr. Castaldi graduated with a degree in finance, accountancy and administration from the University of Nice.

146

Table of Contents

Keith Woods has over 25 years of experience in the biopharmaceutical industry. He most recently served as Senior Vice President of North American Operations for Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Alexion), where he managed a team of several hundred people in the U.S. and Canada and was responsible for more than $1 billion in annual sales. Within Alexion, he previously served as Vice President and Managing Director of Alexion UK, overseeing all aspects of Alexion’s U.K. business; Vice President of U.S. Operations; and Executive Director of Sales, leading the launch of Soliris in atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome. Prior to joining Alexion, he held various positions of increasing responsibility within Roche, Amgen and Eisai over a span of 20 years. Keith Woods holds a B.S. in Marketing from Florida State University.

Wim Parys obtained a MD degree from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium. He was in private practice for nine years before joining the Janssen Research Foundation in Beerse, Belgium where he held several R&D positions and developed galantamine (Reminyl™/Razadyne™) for Alzheimer’s Disease. In 2000, he became the Head of Development at the biotech company Tibotec and relocated to the US to establish Tibotec Inc., the US based subsidiary. Under his tenure, Tibotec (then acquired by J&J) developed and launched Prezista™, Intelence™ and Edurant™, three innovative HIV drugs. As Development Head of Janssen’s Infectious Diseases and Vaccines therapeutic area, he lead the discovery and development of other medicines for HIV, Hepatitis C (Incivo™, Olysio™/Sovriad™), TB (Sirturo™) and respiratory viral diseases. In 2013, he became the R&D head of the newly established Global Public Health group, responsible for a portfolio including programs in HIV, TB, other mycobacterial infections, Dengue and Malaria. Wim joined argenx early 2019 as a development consultant and transitioned to the role of Chief Medical Officer on July 1, 2019.

Prof. Hans de Haard has served as our Chief Scientific Officer since July 2008. Prof. de Haard has been active in the antibody engineering field since 1989. He also serves as a Professor of Immunology at University of Franche Comté (France). Prof. de Haard holds an M.Sc. in biochemistry from the Higher Professional Education for Laboratory Technicians (Oss, the Netherlands) and a M.Sc. in chemistry from the Institute of Technology (Rotterdam, the Netherlands) and a Ph.D. in molecular immunology from Maastricht University.

Arjen Lemmen serves as the head of our strategy and corporate development activities. He joined argenx in 2016 and has successfully executed several transactions including a number of programs within our Innovative Access Program and our strategic collaboration with Janssen on cusatuzumab. Prior to joining argenx, he served as a corporate finance specialist at Kempen & Co focusing on M&A, Equity Capital Markets and strategic advisory transactions in the European life sciences industry. Mr. Lemmen holds a B.Sc. in Life Science & Technology from the University of Groningen (the Netherlands) and Master of Engineering Management from Duke University. Arjen was promoted to Vice-President of Corporate Development & Strategy per June 1, 2019.

Dirk Beeusaert has served as our General Counsel since April 1, 2017. Mr. Beeusaert has extensive general experience in corporate governance and as general counsel of a listed company. Mr. Beeusaert worked in various roles from February 1996 to July 2016 for Gimv NV, a European private equity company listed on Euronext Brussels, including chief legal officer from January 2001 to 2006, and general counsel from 2006 to July 2016, where he was co‑responsible for operations and corporate governance. Mr. Beeusaert currently serves as a member of the boards of directors of Pragma Capital SAS and Cubigo NV. Mr. Beeusaert holds a Bachelor in Law and a Master Law degree from Ghent University and an MBA in Fiscal Studies and Accounting Research, Tax and Accounting from Vlerick School of Management.

General Information About Our Directors and Executive Management

As of the date of this Annual Report, none of the members of our board of directors and executive management has a family relationship with any other member of our board of directors or executive management.

As of the date of this Annual Report and except as set out below, none of the members of our board of directors and executive management for at least the previous five years:

| · |  | has been convicted of any fraudulent offenses;

147

Table of Contents

| · |  | has been a senior manager or a member of the administrative, management or supervisory bodies of any company at the time of or preceding any bankruptcy, receivership or liquidation;

| · |  | has been subject to any official public incrimination and/or sanction by any statutory or regulatory authority (including any designated professional body); or

| · |  | has ever been disqualified by a court from acting as a member of the administrative, management or supervisory bodies of any company or from acting in the management or conduct of affairs of any company.

Peter K.M. Verhaeghe—PharmaNeuroBoost NV

Mr. Verhaeghe was chairman of the board of directors of PharmaNeuroBoost NV, which voluntarily filed for bankruptcy in 2013 after its Phase 3 trial failed and no additional funding was found to continue its operations.

Peter K.M. Verhaeghe—KBC Private Equity Fund Biotech NV

Mr. Verhaeghe was a member of the board of directors of KBC Private Equity Fund Biotech NV, a Euronext‑listed fund, when it voluntarily liquidated pursuant to a decision of its shareholders. Mr. Verhaeghe was appointed as liquidator in charge and closed the liquidation by the end of 2012 with net proceeds for the shareholders of over €6 per share.

B. COMPENSATION

Compensation of Our Executive Management and Board of Directors

Our shareholders have adopted a policy governing the remuneration of our board of directors, which is aimed to attract, reward and retain highly qualified executive and non‑executive directors and to provide and motivate the members of our board of directors with a balanced and competitive remuneration that is focused on sustainable results and is aligned with the long‑term strategy of the company as set out in its business plan.

At the General Meeting on April 28, 2016, the shareholders approved an amended remuneration policy, or the Remuneration Policy, which allows for the granting of compensation packages to our directors in line with a benchmarking analysis performed by an independent consulting firm engaged by our remuneration and nomination committee and an assessment of the duties of the directors, and includes competitive severance arrangements intended to attract and retain highly qualified personnel. At the extraordinary shareholders’ meeting of our shareholders held on November 7, 2017, the shareholders approved an amendment to the Remuneration Policy, discussed in more detail below. For a discussion of our employment arrangements with our executive management, see the section of this annual report titled “Item 7.B.—Related Party Transactions—Agreements with Our Executive Management.”

Except the arrangements described in the section of this annual report titled “Related‑Party Transactions—Agreements with Our Executive Management” there are no arrangements or understanding between us and any of the executive directors providing for benefits upon termination of their employment, other than as required by applicable law.

Compensation of Our Executive Management

The remuneration of our executive management (including our executive directors) consists of the following fixed and variable components:

| · |  | a fixed base salary;

| · |  | an annual variable pay (short‑term annual cash incentive);

| · |  | long‑term variable incentive awards, in the form of stock options;

148

Table of Contents

| · |  | severance arrangements; and

| · |  | pension and fringe benefits.

Fixed base salary. The base salary of our executive management was determined on the basis of a benchmarking analysis completed by an independent consulting firm. In accordance with this benchmarking analysis, our board of directors has resolved to aim for a compensation of our executive management in the 75th percentile of the compensation offered by the European peer group for executive management living in Europe and 50th percentile offered by the U.S. peer group for executive management living in the United States, each time as identified by the independent consulting firm used in this analysis. The base salary of the executive directors will be determined at a range around the median salary levels payable within a blend of both European and U.S. peer groups.

Variable annual cash bonus. The objective of this short-term annual cash incentive is to ensure that our executive management is incentivized to achieve performance targets in the shorter term. Our executive management is eligible for an annual cash incentive up to a maximum percentage of his/her annual base salary. The maximum percentage for this purpose was set at 50% of base salary of the chief executive officer, 40% of base salary of the Chief Operating Officer and at 35% of base salary for other members of the executive management. Performance conditions are established by our board of directors before or at the beginning of the relevant calendar year and shall include criteria concerning our financial performance, qualitative criteria representing our performance and/or individual qualitative performance.

Long‑term incentive awards. Our board of directors intends to incentivize our executive management by issuing Options from time to time to be able to attract and retain well‑qualified executive management in connection with the argenx Employee Stock Option Plan, as set out below. Typically, options are granted annually in accordance with our stock option grant scheme which is regularly reviewed by our board of directors and particularly our remuneration and nomination committee.

Severance arrangements. We have entered into management contracts and employment agreements with our executive management, each of which provides for certain minimum notice periods if their service or employment with us is terminated in certain circumstances as described below in “Related Party Transactions—Agreements with our Executive Management.”

Pension and fringe benefits. Our executive management participates in a defined contribution pension scheme operated by a third party pension insurance organization. Our executive management is entitled to customary fringe benefits, such as a company car and a hospitalization plan.

The following table sets forth information regarding compensation paid by us for Tim Van Hauwermeiren during the year ended December 31, 2019:

Tim Van Hauwermeiren

|  | Compensation
|  | (€)
Base salary |  | 525,000
Option awards(1) |  | 5,257,360
Employer social security contribution stock options |  | —
Non‑equity incentive plan compensation(2) |  | 326,288
Pension contributions |  | 21,532
Social security costs |  | 10,587
Other(3) |  | 11,558
Total |  | 6,152,325

| (1) |  | Amount shown represents the expenses with respect to the option awards granted in 2019 to Mr. Van Hauwermeiren measured using the Black Scholes formula. For a description of the assumptions used in valuing these awards, see note 13 to our financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report. These amounts do not reflect the actual economic value realized by Mr. Van Hauwermeiren.

149

Table of Contents

| (2) |  | We have an established practice to provide the variable pay partially in the form of OTC options. For those beneficiaries that opt to receive their bonus through over the counter (OTC) options rather than through a payment in cash. As a result, whereas the basis for calculating the cash bonus is a maximum of 55% of base salary, in practice this may be paid in OTC options, representing a higher percentage of the annual base salary (in 2019: 62.15%), which provides a benefit to argenx as well as the employee.

| (3) |  | Consists of €11,382 attributable to the lease of a company car and €176 in employer-paid medical insurance premiums.

The following table sets forth information regarding aggregate compensation paid by us for the members of our executive management (excluding Tim Van Hauwermeiren) during the year ended December 31, 2019:

|  | Compensation
|  | (€)
Base salary |  | 2,002,255
Option awards(1) |  | 16,589,721
Employer social security contribution stock options(2) |  | 9,160,263
Non‑equity incentive plan compensation |  | 648,999
Termination benefits |  | 470,400
Pension contributions |  | 122,025
Social security costs |  | 801,841
Other(3) |  | 110,488
TOTAL |  | 29,905,992

| (1) |  | Amount shown represents the expenses with respect to the option awards granted in 2019 to Mr. Keith Woods, Mr. Eric Castaldi, Prof. Hans de Haard, Mr. Wim Parys, Mr. Arjen Lemmen and Mr. Dirk Beeusaert measured using the Black Scholes formula. For a description of the assumptions used in the valuing these awards, see note 13 to our consolidated financial statements incorporated by reference in this annual report. These amounts do not reflect the actual economic value realized by these members of our executive management.

| (2) |  | The Company incurs employer social security costs with respect to the option awards granted to the members of our executive management. The amount of employer social security costs depends on the actual economic value realized and therefore varies based on the price of our ordinary shares. At each reporting date, the Company makes a calculation of the exposure.

| (3) |  | Consists of €58,765 attributable to the leases of company cars, €20,080 in car, housing and other allowances and €31,643 in employer-paid medical insurance premiums.

The following table sets forth information regarding option awards granted to our executive management during the year ended December 31, 2019:

Name |  | Stock options |  | Expiration date |  | Exercise price
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 80,000 |  | 12/20/2029 |  | € | 135.75
Eric Castaldi (1) |  | 50,000 |  | 12/20/2029 |  | € | 135.75
Hans de Haard (1) |  | 50,000 |  | 12/20/2029 |  | € | 135.75
Keith Woods |  | 50,000 |  | 12/20/2029 |  | € | 135.75
Wim Parys (1) |  | 50,000 |  | 12/20/2029 |  | € | 135.75
Arjen Lemmen (1) |  | 50,000 |  | 12/20/2029 |  | € | 135.75
Dirk Beeusaert |  | 50,000 |  | 6/28/2029 |  | € | 113.49

| (1) |  | On December 20, 2019, the Company has granted options for which the beneficiary has a 60 day period to choose between a contractual term of five or ten years.

150

Table of Contents

The table below shows the stock options held at the start of the year ended December 31, 2019 and the stock options granted to our executive management which have vested during the year ended December 31, 2019, as well as the stock options to vest in the years ending December 31, 2020, December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2022 (in number of stock options), and the respective exercise price of such stock options:

|  | Total |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Total |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |
|  | options |  | Options |  | Options |  | Options |  | options |  | Options |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  |  | to |  |  |  |  | to |  |  |  |  | to |  |  |
|  | held on |  | granted |  | forfeited |  | exercised |  | held on |  | vested |  |  |  |  | vested |  |  |  |  | vest |  |  |  |  | vest |  |  |  |  | vest |  |  |
|  | January 1, |  | in |  | in |  | in |  | December 31, |  | until |  | Exercise |  | in |  | Exercise |  | in |  | Exercise |  | in |  | Exercise |  | in |  | Exercise
Name |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | price |  | 2019 |  | price |  | 2020 |  | price |  | 2021 |  | price |  | 2022 |  | price
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 336,200 |  | 80,000 |  | — |  | (30,000) |  | 386,200 |  | 35,000 |  | € | 7.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 30,600 |  | € | 9.47 |  |  |  | € | 9.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 43,056 |  | € | 11.47 |  | 6,944 |  | € | 11.47 |  |  |  | € | 11.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 20,400 |  | € | 14.13 |  | 10,200 |  | € | 14.13 |  |  |  | € | 14.13 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 26,667 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 26,666 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 26,667 |  | € | 21.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 26,667 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 26,666 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 26,667 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 26,667 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 26,666 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 26,667 |  | € | 135.75
Eric Castaldi |  | 249,768 |  | 50,000 |  | — |  | (71,968) |  | 227,800 |  | 28,200 |  | € | 9.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 24,283 |  | € | 11.47 |  | 3,917 |  | € | 11.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 18,800 |  | € | 14.13 |  | 9,400 |  | € | 14.13 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 16,667 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 16,666 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 16,667 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 16,667 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 16,666 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 16,667 |  | € | 135.75
Keith Woods |  | 125,000 |  | 50,000 |  | — |  | (25,000) |  | 150,000 |  | — |  | € | 21.17 |  | 25,000 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 25,000 |  | € | 21.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 16,667 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 16,666 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 16,667 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 16,667 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 16,666 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 16,667 |  | € | 135.75
Hans De Haard |  | 445,975 |  | 50,000 |  | — |  | — |  | 495,975 |  | 144,822 |  | € | 2.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 109,000 |  | € | 7.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 28,200 |  | € | 9.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 24,283 |  | € | 11.47 |  | 3,917 |  | € | 11.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 18,800 |  | € | 14.13 |  | 9,400 |  | € | 14.13 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,177 |  | € | 18.41 |  | 4,784 |  | € | 18.41 |  | 2,392 |  | € | 18.41 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 16,667 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 16,666 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 16,667 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 16,667 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 16,666 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 16,667 |  | € | 135.75
Wim Parys |  | 125,000 |  | 50,000 |  | — |  | — |  | 175,000 |  | — |  | € | 86.32 |  | 41,667 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 41,666 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 41,667 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 16,667 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 16,666 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 16,667 |  | € | 135.75
Arjen Lemmen |  | 51,276 |  | 50,000 |  | — |  | — |  | 101,276 |  | 3,106 |  | € | 11.47 |  | 694 |  | € | 11.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 2,333 |  | € | 14.13 |  | 1,667 |  | € | 14.13 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 2,388 |  | € | 18.41 |  | 2,392 |  | € | 18.41 |  | 1,196 |  | € | 18.41 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 21.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 2,500 |  | € | 80.82 |  | 1,667 |  | € | 80.82 |  | 833 |  | € | 80.82 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,500 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 7,500 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 7,500 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 16,667 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 16,666 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 16,667 |  | € | 135.75
Dirk Beeusaert |  | 104,682 |  | 50,000 |  | — |  | — |  | 154,682 |  | 19,841 |  | € | 18.41 |  | 13,227 |  | € | 18.41 |  | 6,614 |  | € | 18.41 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 5,000 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 5,000 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 5,000 |  | € | 21.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 14,100 |  | € | 80.82 |  | 9,400 |  | € | 80.82 |  | 4,700 |  | € | 80.82 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,267 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 7,266 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 7,267 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 25,000 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 16,667 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 8,333 |  | € | 135.75
Nicolas Leupin |  | 127,800 |  | — |  | — |  | (95,619) |  | 32,181 |  | — |  | € | 11.47 |  | 3,917 |  | € | 11.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 9,400 |  | € | 14.13 |  |  |  | € | 11.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Torsten Dreier |  | 379,948 |  | — |  | — |  | (65,890) |  | 314,058 |  | 71,690 |  | € | 2.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 105,000 |  | € | 7.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 28,200 |  | € | 9.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 24,283 |  | € | 11.47 |  | 3,917 |  | € | 11.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 18,800 |  | € | 14.13 |  | 9,400 |  | € | 14.13 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 4,784 |  | € | 18.41 |  | 3,189 |  | € | 18.41 |  | 1,595 |  | € | 18.41 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Debbie Allen |  | 249,311 |  | — |  | (28,200) |  | (7,990) |  | 213,121 |  | 39,195 |  | € | 2.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 2,626 |  | € | 3.95 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 43,500 |  | € | 7.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 28,200 |  | € | 9.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 24,283 |  | € | 11.47 |  | 3,917 |  | € | 11.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 18,800 |  | € | 14.13 |  | 9,400 |  | € | 14.13 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 14,400 |  | € | 21.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |

151

Table of Contents

The table below shows the remaining term of the stock options held by our executive management during the year ended December 31, 2019.

|  |  |  | Remaining term on |
|  | Number of |  | December 31, 2019 |
Name |  | stock options |  | (rounded up) |
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 35,000 |  | 5.0 years |
|  | 30,600 |  | 6.0 years |
|  | 50,000 |  | 6.5 years |
|  | 30,600 |  | 7.0 years |
|  | 80,000 |  | 8.0 years |
|  | 80,000 |  | 9.0 years |
|  | 80,000 |  | 10.0 years |
Eric Castaldi |  | 28,200 |  | 6.0 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 6.5 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 7.0 years |
|  | 43,200 |  | 8.0 years |
|  | 50,000 |  | 9.0 years |
|  | 50,000 |  | 5.0 / 10.0 years | (1)
Keith Woods |  | 50,000 |  | 8.0 years |
|  | 50,000 |  | 9.0 years |
|  | 50,000 |  | 10.0 years |
Hans De Haard |  | 69,360 |  | 3.5 years |
|  | 39,636 |  | 4.0 years |
|  | 144,826 |  | 5.0 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 6.0 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 6.5 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 7.0 years |
|  | 14,353 |  | 7.5 years |
|  | 43,200 |  | 8.0 years |
|  | 50,000 |  | 10.0 years |
|  | 50,000 |  | 5.0 / 10.0 years | (1)
Wim Parys |  | 125,000 |  | 4.0 years |
|  | 50,000 |  | 5.0 / 10.0 years | (1)
Arjen Lemmen |  | 3,800 |  | 6.5 years |
|  | 4,000 |  | 7.0 years |
|  | 5,976 |  | 7.5 years |
|  | 10,000 |  | 8.0 years |
|  | 2,500 |  | 3.5 years |
|  | 2,500 |  | 8.5 years |
|  | 11,250 |  | 4.0 years |
|  | 11,250 |  | 9.0 years |
|  | 50,000 |  | 5.0 / 10.0 years | (1)
Dirk Beeusaert |  | 39,682 |  | 7.5 years |
|  | 15,000 |  | 8.0 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 3.5 years |
|  | 21,800 |  | 4.0 years |
|  | 50,000 |  | 5.0 years |
Nicolas Leupin |  | 781 |  | 6.5 years |
|  | 8,200 |  | 7.0 years |
|  | 23,200 |  | 8.0 years |
Torsten Dreier |  | 37,654 |  | 4.0 years |
|  | 139,036 |  | 5.0 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 6.0 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 6.5 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 7.0 years |
|  | 9,568 |  | 7.5 years |
|  | 43,200 |  | 8.0 years |
Debbie Allen |  | 18,770 |  | 3.5 years |
|  | 10,727 |  | 4.0 years |
|  | 55,824 |  | 5.0 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 6.0 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 6.5 years |
|  | 28,200 |  | 7.0 years |
|  | 43,200 |  | 8.0 years |

| (1) |  | On December 20, 2019, the Company has granted options for which the beneficiary has a 60 day period to choose between a contractual term of five or ten years.

152

Table of Contents

The table below shows the stock options exercised by our executive management during the year ended December 31, 2019 and the exercise price of those stock options. Per exercised option, one share was issued.

|  | Number of |  | Exercise
Name |  | stock options |  | price
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 30,000 |  | € | 7.17
Eric Castaldi |  | 30,961 |  | € | 7.17
Eric Castaldi |  | 41,007 |  | € | 2.44
Keith Woods |  | 25,000 |  | € | 21.17
Nicolas Leupin |  | 28,200 |  | € | 9.47
Nicolas Leupin |  | 27,419 |  | € | 11.47
Nicolas Leupin |  | 20,000 |  | € | 14.13
Nicolas Leupin |  | 20,000 |  | € | 21.17
Torsten Dreier |  | 65,890 |  | € | 2.44
Debbie Allen |  | 7,990 |  | € | 3.95
Total |  | 296,467 |  |  |

Compensation of Our Non‑Executive Directors

The remuneration of the individual members of the board of directors is determined by the non‑executive directors, at the recommendation of the remuneration and nomination committee, within the limits of the Remuneration Policy adopted by the shareholders at the General Meeting. The description below reflects the status of our Remuneration Policy as updated by our board of directors on September 12, 2017 and giving effect to the update to the Remuneration Policy approved by our shareholders at the extraordinary shareholders’ meeting held on November 7, 2017.

Pursuant to the Remuneration Policy, the remuneration of the non‑executive directors consists of the following fixed and variable components:

| · |  | a fixed fee, which fee will be prorated if the non‑executive director does not attend all meetings where his or her presence is required;

| · |  | if applicable, a fee for chairing the audit committee, the research and development committee or the remuneration and nomination committee;

| · |  | a fixed fee for board committee membership; and

| · |  | a long‑term variable incentive, in the form of stock options.

Fixed fee. The board of directors has set the annual base remuneration for non‑executive directors at €35,000, additional remuneration for the chairperson of the board of directors at €30,000, additional remuneration for the chairperson of the audit committee and the research and development committee of the board of directors at €15,000 and additional remuneration for the chairperson of the remuneration and nomination committee of the board of directors at €10,000. Board committee members, other than the chairman of the relevant committee, receive an annual retainer of €5,000 for the remuneration and nomination committee and a €7,500 retainer for the members of the audit committee and the research and development committee.

Long‑term incentive plan. The board of directors intends to incentivize the non‑executive directors by issuing options from time to time to be able to attract and retain well‑qualified non‑executive directors in connection with the argenx Employee Stock Option Plan. The board of directors grants options to the non‑executive directors on the recommendation of the remuneration and nomination committee. Such option grants are based on an option allocation scheme established by the board of directors pursuant to the argenx Employee Stock Option Plan. The conditions of our option plan apply to our non‑executive directors, as set forth in “—argenx Employee Stock Option Plan.”

153

Table of Contents

Success payment. In exceptional circumstances, the board of directors may decide to reward a non‑executive director with a success payment relating to the occurrence of specific events achieved through the exceptional efforts of that person (such as a platform licensing or product licensing deal brokered by that non‑executive director).

Pursuant to the Remuneration Policy, in case of a dismissal, non‑executive directors will not be entitled to a severance payment.

The following table sets forth the information regarding the compensation earned by our non‑executive directors during the year ended December 31, 2019:

|  | Fees earned |  |  |  |  |
|  | or paid in |  | Option |  |  |
|  | cash |  | awards |  |  |
Name |  | (€) |  | (€)(1) |  | Total
Peter K.M. Verhaeghe |  | 77,500 |  | 657,170 |  | € | 734,670
David L. Lacey |  | 50,000 |  | 657,170 |  |  | 707,170
Werner Lanthaler |  | 55,000 |  | 657,170 |  |  | 712,170
Pamela Klein |  | 42,500 |  | 657,170 |  |  | 699,670
J. Donald deBethizy |  | 52,500 |  | 657,170 |  |  | 709,670
A.A. Rosenberg |  | 50,000 |  | 657,170 |  |  | 707,170
James M. Daly |  | 50,000 |  | 657,170 |  |  | 707,170

| (1) |  | These amounts do not reflect the actual economic value realized by the non-executive director. Amount shown represents the expenses with respect to the option awards granted in 2019 to the non-executive directors measured using the Black Scholes formula. For a description of the assumptions used in valuing these awards, see note 13 to our consolidated financial statements incorporated by reference in annual report.

The table below shows the stock options held at the start of the year ended December 31, 2019 and the stock options granted to the non‑executive directors which have vested during the year ended December 31, 2019,

154

Table of Contents

as well as the stock options to vest in the years ending December 31, 2020, December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2022 (in number of stock options), and the respective exercise price of such stock options:

|  | Total |  |  |  |  |  | Total |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |
|  | options |  | Options |  | Options |  | options |  | Options |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  |  | to |  |  |  |  | to |  |  |  |  | to |  |  |
|  | held on |  | granted |  | exercised |  | held on |  | vested |  |  |  |  | vested |  |  |  |  | vest |  |  |  |  | vest |  |  |  |  | vest |  |  |
|  | January 1, |  | in |  | in |  | December 31, |  | until |  |  | Exercise |  | in |  |  | Exercise |  | in |  | Exercise |  | in |  | Exercise |  | in |  | Exercise
Name |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  |  | price |  | 2019 |  |  | price |  | 2020 |  | price |  | 2021 |  | price |  | 2022 |  | price
Peter Verhaeghe |  | 44,585 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 54,585 |  | 11,626 |  | € | 2.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,959 |  | € | 3.95 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 5,000 |  | € | 7.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 8,333 |  | € | 11.38 |  | 1,667 |  | € | 11.38 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
David L. Lacey |  | 54,443 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 64,443 |  | 6,643 |  | € | 2.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 12,800 |  | € | 7.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 8,333 |  | € | 11.38 |  | 1,667 |  | € | 11.38 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 5,000 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 5,000 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 5,000 |  | € | 21.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
Werner Lanthaler |  | 14,444 |  | 10,000 |  | (4,444) |  | 20,000 |  | — |  | € | 2.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | — |  | € | 7.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | — |  | € | 11.38 |  | — |  | € | 11.38 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
J. Donald deBethizy |  | 35,000 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 45,000 |  | 15,000 |  | € | 11.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 8,333 |  | € | 11.38 |  | 1,667 |  | € | 11.38 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
Pamela Klein |  | 35,000 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 45,000 |  | 15,000 |  | € | 11.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 8,333 |  | € | 11.38 |  | 1,667 |  | € | 11.38 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
A.A. Rosenberg |  | 25,000 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 35,000 |  | 10,000 |  | € | 14.13 |  | 5,000 |  | € | 14.13 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
James M. Daly |  | 25,000 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 35,000 |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,500 |  | € | 80.82 |  | 5,000 |  | € | 80.82 |  | 2,500 |  | € | 80.82 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75

155

Table of Contents

The table below shows the remaining term of the stock options held by the non‑executive directors during the year ended December 31, 2019.

|  |  |  | Remaining term on
|  | Number of |  | December 31, 2019
Name |  | stock options |  | (rounded up)
Peter K.M. Verhaeghe |  | 3,650 |  | 0.5 years
|  | 2,340 |  | 1.0 years
|  | 5,560 |  | 3.5 years
|  | 3,181 |  | 4.0 years
|  | 9,854 |  | 5.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 6.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
David L. Lacey |  | 3,180 |  | 3.5 years
|  | 1,818 |  | 4.0 years
|  | 14,445 |  | 5.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 6.5 years
|  | 15,000 |  | 8.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
Werner Lanthaler |  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
J. Donald deBethizy |  | 15,000 |  | 5.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 6.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
Pamela Klein |  | 15,000 |  | 5.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 6.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
A.A. Rosenberg |  | 15,000 |  | 7.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
James M. Daly |  | 15,000 |  | 8.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years

The table below shows the stock options exercised by our executive management during the year ended December 31, 2019 and the exercise price of those stock options. Per exercised option, one share was issued.

|  | Number of |  | Exercise
Name |  | stock options |  | price
Werner Lanthaler |  | 4,444 |  | € | 11.38
Total |  | 4,444 |  |  |

argenx Employee Stock Option Plan

On December 18, 2014, our board of directors adopted an employee stock option plan, or the Option Plan, which was approved by the shareholders at the General Meeting on May 13, 2015 and amended by the General Meeting on April 28, 2016. The aim of the Option Plan is to encourage our executive management, directors and key outside consultants and advisors to acquire an economic and beneficial ownership interest in the growth and performance of the company, to increase their incentive to contribute to our value and to attract and retain individuals who are key to our company.

156

Table of Contents

The Option Plan was further amended by the board of directors and approved by the General Meeting on November 25, 2019. The following amendments were made:

| - |  | the terms of the Option Plan were updated to reflect the latest changes in applicable laws, including the Market Abuse Regulation;

| - |  | specific provisions were added to govern the granting of 'sign-on-options' for attracting new (key) personnel; and

| - |  | the Option Plan now contains a description of the method the Company applies for determining the amount of options to grant to key persons, which is based on a transparent and objective option allocation scheme.

In connection with the Option Plan, our board of directors has also established an option allocation scheme. The option allocation scheme contains (i) the date on which options are granted each year, which shall be the same date each year and (ii) the number of options granted to each person or to each group of persons, which shall be based on objective criteria only.

Our board of directors, in each case subject to the approval of the majority of the non‑executive directors, may grant options to our executive management, directors or key outside consultants or advisors and in accordance with the option allocation scheme. Our board of directors may also grant options at its discretion outside of the option allocation scheme, but only in a period when no inside information (as specified our insider trading policy) is available. Persons to whom options are granted cannot refuse to accept such options.

The aggregate number of shares that may be available for the issuance of options is equal to 14.5% of our fully‑diluted share capital. Shares issued pursuant to the exercise of an option are counted towards the share capital, and options that cease to exist (whether through exercise, termination or otherwise) are restored to the foregoing limit and shall again be available for issuance under the Option Plan. Shares shall be charged against the forgoing limit upon the grant of each option, but if such shares are thereafter forfeited or such option otherwise terminates without the issuance of such shares or of other consideration in lieu of such shares, the shares so forfeited or related to the terminated portion of such option shall be restored to the foregoing limit and shall again be available for options under the Option Plan.

Options granted pursuant to the Option Plan shall vest with respect to one third of the shares upon the first anniversary of the date of grant, with the remaining two thirds vesting in twenty‑four equal monthly installments with the option fully vesting upon the third anniversary of the date of grant, subject, in each case, to the optionee’s continued status.

Each option shall be granted with an exercise price equal to the fair market value upon the date of grant and shall have a term equal to ten years from the date of grant. In the case of a (i) sale, merger, consolidation, tender offer or similar acquisition of shares or other transaction or series of related transactions as a result of which a change in control occurs, (ii) sale or other disposition of all or substantially all of the company’s assets or (iii) dissolution and/or liquidation of the company, then 100% of any unvested options shall vest.

Our board of directors, upon approval of a majority of the non‑executive directors may amend or terminate the Option Plan or may amend the terms of any outstanding options, provided that no amendment or termination may affect any existing rights without the consent of the affected optionees.

As of March 16, 2020, there were 4,250,535 options outstanding which represent approximately 9.9% of the total number of all our issued and outstanding voting financial instruments.

157

Table of Contents

The table below sets forth the details of all options granted under the argenx Employee Stock Option Plan in force as of December 31, 2019, including the offer date, exercise price, expiry date, number of options exercised, number of options voided and number of options outstanding. Aside from the stock options set forth in the below table, there are currently no other stock options, options to purchase securities, convertible securities or other rights to subscribe for or purchase outstanding securities.

|  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  | Number of |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | Number of |  | Number of |  | Number of |  | options |  |  |  |
|  | Offer |  | Exercise |  | options |  | options |  | options |  | still |  | Exercisable |  | Expiry
Plan |  | date |  | price (€) |  | granted |  | exercised |  | voided |  | outstanding |  | from |  | date
SOP A |  | 5/11/2010 |  | 3.95 |  | 103,370 |  | 99,670 |  | — |  | 3,700 |  | 5/11/2013 |  | 5/11/2020
SOP A |  | 11/30/2010 |  | 3.95 |  | 62,460 |  | 58,950 |  | — |  | 3,510 |  | 11/30/2013 |  | 11/30/2020
SOP A |  | 2/1/2011 |  | 3.95 |  | 3,800 |  | 3,800 |  | — |  | — |  | 2/1/2014 |  | 2/1/2021
SOP B |  | 5/23/2013 |  | 2.44 |  | 305,740 |  | 133,950 |  | — |  | 171,790 |  | 5/23/2016 |  | 5/23/2023
SOP B |  | 12/4/2013 |  | 2.44 |  | 174,747 |  | 134,768 |  | — |  | 39,979 |  | 12/4/2016 |  | 12/4/2023
SOP B |  | 6/30/2014 |  | 2.44 |  | 109,820 |  | 103,820 |  | — |  | 6,000 |  | 6/30/2017 |  | 6/30/2024
Reshuffling A |  | 9/30/2014 |  | 3.95 |  | 55,746 |  | 49,508 |  | — |  | 6,238 |  | 9/30/2017 |  | 9/30/2024
Reshuffling B1 |  | 9/30/2014 |  | 2.44 |  | 174,362 |  | 79,638 |  | — |  | 94,724 |  | 9/30/2017 |  | 9/30/2024
Reshuffling B2 |  | 9/30/2014 |  | 2.44 |  | 19,719 |  | 17,747 |  | — |  | 1,972 |  | 9/30/2017 |  | 9/30/2024
SOP 2014.12.18 |  | 12/18/2014 |  | 7.17 |  | 585,250 |  | 202,433 |  | 47,750 |  | 335,067 |  | 12/18/2017 |  | 12/18/2024
SOP 2015.06.18 |  | 6/18/2015 |  | 11.44 |  | 56,500 |  | — |  | 17,500 |  | 39,000 |  | 6/18/2018 |  | 6/18/2025
SOP 2015.09.03 |  | 9/3/2015 |  | 10.34 |  | 3,000 |  | — |  | — |  | 3,000 |  | 9/3/2018 |  | 9/3/2025
SOP 2015.12.15 |  | 12/15/2015 |  | 9.47 |  | 243,400 |  | 49,518 |  | 8,050 |  | 185,832 |  | 12/15/2018 |  | 12/15/2025
SOP 2016.05.25 |  | 5/25/2016 |  | 11.47 |  | 288,950 |  | 61,512 |  | 7,647 |  | 219,791 |  | 5/25/2019 |  | 5/25/2026
SOP 2016.06.18 |  | 6/18/2016 |  | 11.38 |  | 60,000 |  | 15,000 |  | — |  | 45,000 |  | 6/18/2019 |  | 6/18/2026
SOP 2016.12.13 |  | 12/13/2016 |  | 14.13 |  | 363,226 |  | 90,295 |  | 14,185 |  | 258,746 |  | 12/13/2019 |  | 12/13/2026
SOP 2017.06.26 |  | 6/26/2017 |  | 18.41 |  | 120,536 |  | 11,463 |  | 460 |  | 108,613 |  | 6/26/2020 |  | 6/26/2027
SOP 2017.12.14 |  | 12/14/2017 |  | 21.17 |  | 653,825 |  | 56,974 |  | 31,053 |  | 565,798 |  | 12/14/2020 |  | 12/14/2027
SOP 2018.06.28 |  | 6/28/2018 |  | 80.82 |  | 97,100 |  | — |  | 3,000 |  | 94,100 |  | 6/28/2021 |  | 6/28/2023
SOP 2018.06.28 |  | 6/28/2018 |  | 80.82 |  | 81,800 |  | 2,350 |  | 6,350 |  | 73,100 |  | 6/28/2021 |  | 6/28/2028
SOP 2018.12.21 |  | 12/21/2018 |  | 86.32 |  | 369,760 |  | — |  | 3,500 |  | 366,260 |  | 12/21/2021 |  | 12/21/2023
SOP 2018.12.21 |  | 12/21/2018 |  | 86.32 |  | 491,815 |  | 8,951 |  | 80,150 |  | 402,714 |  | 12/21/2021 |  | 12/21/2028
SOP 2019.06.28 |  | 6/28/2019 |  | 113.49 |  | 311,797 |  | — |  | 32,037 |  | 279,760 |  | 6/28/2022 |  | 6/28/2024
SOP 2019.06.28 |  | 6/28/2019 |  | 113.49 |  | 111,690 |  | — |  | — |  | 111,690 |  | 6/28/2022 |  | 6/28/2029
SOP 2019.11.01 |  | 11/1/2019 |  | 113.49 |  | 19,800 |  | — |  | — |  | 19,800 |  | 11/1/2022 |  | 11/1/2029
SOP 2019.12.20 (1) |  | 12/20/2019 |  | 135.75 |  | 921,885 |  | — |  | — |  | 921,885 |  | 12/20/2022 |  | 12/20/2029
Total |  |  |  |  |  | 5,790,098 |  | 1,180,347 |  | 251,682 |  | 4,358,069 |  |  |  |

| (1) |  | On December 20, 2019, the company had granted options for which the beneficiary had a 60-day period to choose between a contractual term of five or ten years.

C. BOARD PRACTICES

Director Independence

As a foreign private issuer, under the listing requirements and rules of Nasdaq, we are not required to have independent directors on our board of directors, except that our audit committee is required to consist fully of independent directors, subject to certain phase‑in schedules. However, our board of directors has determined that, under current listing requirements and rules of Nasdaq and taking into account any applicable committee independence standards, all of our non‑executive directors are “independent directors.” In making such determination, our board of directors considered the relationships that each non‑executive director has with us and all other facts and circumstances our board of directors deemed relevant in determining the director’s independence, including the number of ordinary shares beneficially owned by the director and his or her affiliated entities (if any).

The DCGC requires that the composition of the non‑executive directors is such that the members are able to operate independently and critically vis‑à‑vis one another, the executive directors, and any particular interests

158

Table of Contents

involved. At the date of this annual report, all of our non‑executive directors meet the independence criteria contained in the DCGC. Therefore, the composition of our non‑executive directors complies with the independence requirements of the DCGC.

Role of the Board in Risk Oversight

Our board of directors is responsible for the oversight of our risk management activities and has delegated to the audit committee the responsibility to assist our board in this task. While our board oversees our risk management, our management is responsible for day‑to‑day risk management processes. Our board of directors expects our management to consider risk and risk management in each business decision, to proactively develop and monitor risk management strategies and processes for day‑to‑day activities and to effectively implement risk management strategies adopted by the board of directors. We believe this division of responsibilities is the most effective approach for addressing the risks we face.

Composition, Appointment and Dismissal

The Articles of Association provide that our board of directors will consist of our executive directors and non‑executive directors. The number of executive directors must at all times be less than the number of non‑executive directors. The number of directors, as well as the number of executive directors and non‑executive directors, is determined by our board of directors, with the proviso that the board of directors must consist of at least three members.

Our directors are appointed by the shareholders at the General Meeting. The board of directors is required to make one or more proposals for each seat on our board of directors to be filled. A resolution to nominate a director by our board of directors (with support from the remuneration and nomination committee) may be adopted by a simple majority of the votes cast. A nomination for appointment of an executive director must state the candidate’s age and the positions he or she holds, or has held, insofar as these are relevant for the performance of the duties of an executive director. The nomination must state the reasons for the nomination of the relevant person. A nomination for appointment of a non‑executive director must state the candidate’s age, his or her profession, the number of shares he or she holds and the employment positions he or she holds, or has held, insofar as these are relevant for the performance of the duties of a non‑executive director. Furthermore, the names of the legal entities of which he or she is already a supervisory board member or a non‑executive member of the board shall be indicated; if those include legal entities which belong to the same group, a reference to that group will be sufficient. The nomination must state the reasons for the nomination of the relevant person.

Our directors are appointed as either an executive director or as a non‑executive director by the shareholders at the General Meeting. Our board of directors designates one executive director as chief executive officer. In addition, the board of directors may grant other titles to executive directors. Our board of directors designates a non‑executive director as chairperson of the board of directors and a non‑executive director as vice chairperson of the board of directors. The legal relationship between a member of the board of directors and the company will not be considered as an employment agreement. Employment agreements between an executive director and a group company (other than us) are permitted. In the absence of an employment agreement, members of a board of directors generally do not enjoy the same protection as employees under Dutch labor law.

Pursuant to the Articles of Association, a member of our board of directors will retire not later than on the day on which the first General Meeting is held following lapse of four years since his appointment. A retiring member of our board of directors may be re-appointed.

Directors may be suspended or removed by the shareholders at the General Meeting at any time, with or without cause, by means of a resolution passed by a simple majority of the votes cast. Under Dutch law, executive directors may also be suspended by the board of directors. A suspension of an executive director by the board of directors may be discontinued by the shareholders at any time at the General Meeting.

159

Table of Contents

We have entered into management contracts and employment agreements with our Board members and executive management that contain certain severance provisions, see section of this annual report titled “Item 7.B.— Related Party Transactions—Agreements with our Executive Management.”

Committees

The committees are advisory bodies only, and the decision‑making remains within the collegial responsibility of the non‑executive directors. The non‑executive directors determine the terms of reference of each committee with respect to the organization, procedures, policies and activities of the committee.

Our non‑executive directors have established and appointed an audit committee, a remuneration and nomination committee and a research and development committee. The composition and function of all of our committees will comply with all applicable requirements of the Exchange Act, the exchanges on which the ordinary shares are listed, SEC rules and regulations and the DCGC.

Only non‑executive directors qualify for membership of the committees. The audit committee and the remuneration and nomination committee may not be chaired by the chairperson of the board of directors or by a former executive director of the company.

Audit Committee

Our audit committee consists of three members: Werner Lanthaler (chairperson), Peter K.M. Verhaeghe and A.A. Rosenberg.

Our board of directors has determined that all members of our audit committee are independent under Rule 10A‑3 of the Exchange Act and the applicable rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market and all members of our audit committee are independent under the applicable rules of the DCGC, and that Werner Lanthaler qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined under the Exchange Act.

Our audit committee assists our board of directors in overseeing the accuracy and integrity of our accounting and financial reporting processes and audits of our consolidated financial statements, the implementation and effectiveness of an internal control system and our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, the independent auditors’ qualifications and independence and the performance of the independent auditors.

The audit committee is governed by a charter that complies with Nasdaq listing rules and the DCGC. Our audit committee is responsible for, among other things:

| · |  | ensuring the integrity of our financial reporting, including review of period information before it is made public;

| · |  | supervising the company’s policies with respect to financing and tax;

| · |  | evaluating our system of internal controls set up by our board of directors, including evaluation and approval of the explanatory notes on internal controls in our annual reports;

| · |  | reviewing the functions of our internal risk management system and the efficacy of these systems, including the review of ICT-applications with a view to cybersecurity;

| · |  | assessing the necessity for setting up an internal audit function; and

| · |  | supervising our relationship with our external auditors during the external audit process, including evaluation of our auditors’ independence.

160

Table of Contents

Our audit committee meets as often as is required for its proper functioning, but at least four times a year. Our audit committee must meet at least once a year with our statutory auditor.

Our audit committee reports regularly to our board of directors on the exercise of its functions. It informs our board of directors about all areas in which action or improvement is necessary in its opinion and produces recommendations concerning the necessary steps that need to be taken. The audit review and the reporting on that review cover us and our subsidiaries as a whole. The members of the audit committee are entitled to receive all information which they need for the performance of their function, from our board of directors and employees. Every member of the audit committee shall exercise this right in consultation with the chairperson of the audit committee.

The audit committee has deliberated six times in the course of 2019. At these meetings, the main points of discussion were review of the 2018 financial statements, 2018 annual report and press release, Deloitte's 2018 audit report, 2019 audit fee proposal and renewal of Deloitte mandate, review of interim consolidated financial statements and press releases, Deloitte's report on interim financial statements, review of quarterly forecasts, updates on internal control activities, updates on corporate audit activities, review of the 2020-2023 business plan, discussions on financing options, and updates on the cash investments.

The meeting attendance rate for our directors in the audit committee is set out in the table below:

Audit Committee | Number of meetings attended in 2019 | Attendance %
Peter Verhaeghe | 7/7 | 100%
Werner Lanthaler | 7/7 | 100%
Tony Rosenberg | 5/7 | 71%

Remuneration and Nomination Committee

Our remuneration and nomination committee consists of three members: J. Donald deBethizy (chairperson), Peter K.M. Verhaeghe and Werner Lanthaler.

Our board of directors has determined that all members of our remuneration and nomination committee are independent under the applicable rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market and all members of our remuneration and nomination committee are independent under the applicable rules of the DCGC.

Our remuneration and nomination committee is responsible for, among other things:

| · |  | reviewing and recommending the remuneration policy for approval by the shareholders at the General Meeting;

| · |  | reviewing and recommending the remuneration policy for the directors for approval by the shareholders at the General Meeting; such proposal shall, in any event, deal with: (i) the remuneration structure and (ii) the amount of the fixed remuneration, the shares and/or options to be granted and/or other variable remuneration components, pension rights, redundancy pay and other forms of compensation to be awarded, as well as the performance criteria and their application;

| · |  | preparing the remuneration report;

| · |  | preparing selection criteria and appointment procedures for directors;

161

Table of Contents

| · |  | periodically assessing the size and composition of our board of directors and making a proposal for a composition profile of the non‑executive directors;

| · |  | periodically assessing the performance of individual directors and reporting on this to the non‑executive directors;

| · |  | making proposals for appointments and reappointments; and

| · |  | supervising the policy of our board of directors on the selection criteria and appointment procedures for senior management.

The remuneration and nomination committee consists of at least three members. The remuneration and nomination committee meets as often as is required for its proper functioning, but at least once per year to evaluate its functioning.

The remuneration and nomination committee has deliberated three times in the course of 2019. The main topics of discussion were management performance reviews, the 2019 long term incentive plan, 2019 management targets, nominations for (re-) appointments to the board and board and executive management diversity.

The meeting attendance rate for our directors in the remuneration and nomination committee is set out in the table below:

Remuneration and Nomination Committee | Number of meetings attended in 2019 | Attendance %
Peter Verhaeghe | 3/3 | 100%
Werner Lanthaler | 3/3 | 100%
Don deBethizy | 3/3 | 100%

Research and Development Committee

Our research and development committee consists of three members: David L. Lacey (chairperson), J. Donald deBethizy and Pamela Klein.

Our board of directors has determined that all members of our research and development committee are independent under the applicable rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market and all members of our research and development committee are independent under the applicable rules of the DCGC.

The research and development committee is responsible for, among other things:

| · |  | monitoring and overseeing the research and development goals, strategies and measures of the company;

| · |  | serving as a sounding board to the company’s research and development management, general management and the board of directors;

| · |  | performing strategic reviews of the company’s key research and development programs;

| · |  | reporting to the board of directors on the outcome of the strategic reviews;

| · |  | reviewing the company’s scientific publication and communications plan;

162

Table of Contents

| · |  | evaluating and challenging the effectiveness and competitiveness of the research and development endeavors of the company;

| · |  | reviewing and discussing emerging scientific trends and activities critical to the success of research and development of the company;

| · |  | reviewing the company’s clinical and preclinical product pipeline; and

| · |  | engaging in attracting, retaining and developing senior research and development personnel of the company.

All members of the research and development committee shall have adequate industrial, academic and/or practical experience with the research and development of biopharmaceuticals.

One purpose of our research and development committee is to engage in discussion with our research and development management, and the committee’s responsibilities to carry out this purpose include, among others: monitoring the research and development activities, performing strategic reviews of the key research and development programs; and reviewing the scientific publication plan.

Our research and development committee meets as often as is required for its proper functioning, but at least prior to each meeting of our board of directors, and reports regularly to our board of directors on the outcome of the strategic reviews. Our research and development committee consists of at least three members with adequate industrial experience with the research and development of biopharmaceuticals. The chairperson of our research and development committee shall report formally to our board of directors on the research and development committee’s deliberations, findings and proceedings after each meeting on all matters within its duties and responsibilities.

The meeting attendance rate for our directors in the research and development committee is set out in the table below:

Research and Development Committee | Number of meetings attended in 2019 | Attendance %
David Lacey | 3/3 | 100%
Donald deBethizy | 3/3 | 100%
Pamela Klein | 3/3 | 100%

Commercial committee

Our commercial committee consists of two members: Jim Daly and Tony Rosenberg.

The commercial committee is responsible for, among other things:

| · |  | serving as a sounding board to the Company's branded and unbranded strategic marketing plans, size and scope of the Company’s franchises, pre and post launch market access plan of action;

| · |  | advising the board of directors on the effectiveness of the governance, risk management and legal compliance of the commercial activities, with an underlying aim of ensuring that these activities are set up and pursued consistent with the achievement by the Company of its strategic goals;

| · |  | reviewing and discussing global commercial and political trends affecting the industry and the development of the Company; and

| · |  | reporting to the board of directors on the outcome of the strategic reviews.

163

Table of Contents

All members of the commercial committee shall have adequate experience in relation to marketing, launch of pharmaceuticals, risk management in relation to commercial activities in our field of business and/or strategic planning of commercialization of pharmaceuticals.

Our commercial committee meets as often as is required for its proper functioning, but at least four times per year, and reports regularly to our board of directors on the outcome of its strategic reviews. Our commercial committee consists of at least three members with adequate experience as described above.

The meeting attendance rate for our directors in the commercial committee is set out in the table below:

Commercial Committee | Number of meetings attended in 2019 | Attendance %
Jim Daly | 3/3 | 100%
Tony Rosenberg | 3/3 | 100%

Corporate Governance Practices

Our board of directors has adopted rules, or the Board By‑Laws, that describe the procedure for holding meetings of the board of directors, for the decision‑making by the board of directors and the board of directors’ operating procedures.

In accordance with our Articles of Association, our board of directors will meet at least once every three months to discuss the state of affairs within the company and the expected developments.

Under the Board By‑Laws, the members of our board of directors must endeavor, insofar as is possible, to ensure that resolutions are adopted unanimously. Where unanimity cannot be achieved and Dutch law, the Articles of Association or the Board By‑Laws do not prescribe a larger majority, all resolutions of our board of directors must be adopted by a simple majority of the votes cast in a meeting at which at least a majority of the members of our board of directors then in office are present or represented. The Articles of Association and the Board By‑Laws provide that in case of a tie of votes, the chairperson does not have a casting vote and as such the proposal will be rejected in case of a tie.

In exceptional cases, if the urgent necessity and the interests of the company require this, resolutions of our board of directors may also be adopted by unanimous written approval of all directors in office.

D. EMPLOYEES

As of December 31, 2019, we had 188 employees. At each date shown below, we had the following number of employees, broken out by department and geography:

|  | At December 31,
|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Function: |  |  |  |  |  |
Research and development |  | 118 |  | 75 |  | 58
Selling, general and administrative |  | 70 |  | 30 |  | 15
Total |  | 188 |  | 105 |  | 73
Geography: |  |  |  |  |  |
Zwijnaarde, Belgium |  | 145 |  | 94 |  | 73
Boston, USA |  | 40 |  | 11 |  | —
Tokyo, Japan |  | 3 |  | — |  |
Breda, the Netherlands |  | — |  | — |  | —
Total |  | 188 |  | 105 |  | 73

164

Table of Contents

Collective bargaining agreements, or CBAs, can be entered into in Belgium at the national, industry, or company levels. These CBAs are binding on both employers and employees. We have no trade union representation or CBAs at the company level, but we are subject to the national and industry level CBAs that relate to the chemical industry. The CBAs currently applicable to us relate to employment conditions such as wages, working time, job security, innovation and supplementary pensions. We have not had, and do not anticipate having, disputes on any of these subjects. CBAs may, however, change the employment conditions of our employees in the future and hence adversely affect our employment relationships.

E. SHARE OWNERSHIP

For information regarding the share ownership of our directors and members of our executive committee, see “Item 6.B.—Compensation” and “Item 7.A.—Major Shareholders”.

ITEM 7. MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

A. MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS

The following table sets forth information with respect to the beneficial ownership of our ordinary shares as of March 16, 2020 for:

| · |  | each person who is known by us to own beneficially more than 3% of our total outstanding ordinary shares;

| · |  | each member of our board of directors and our executive management;

| · |  | all members of our board of directors and our executive management as a group.

Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC. These rules generally attribute beneficial ownership of securities to persons who possess sole or shared voting power or investment power with respect to those securities and include ordinary shares that can be acquired within 60 days of March 16, 2020. The percentage ownership information shown in the table is based upon 42,791,076 ordinary shares outstanding as of March 16, 2020.

Except as otherwise indicated, all of the shares reflected in the table are ordinary shares and all persons listed below have sole voting and investment power with respect to the shares beneficially owned by them, subject to applicable community property laws. The information is not necessarily indicative of beneficial ownership for any other purpose.

In computing the number of ordinary shares beneficially owned by a person and the percentage ownership of that person, we deemed outstanding ordinary shares subject to options held by that person that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020. We did not deem these shares outstanding, however,

165

Table of Contents

for the purpose of computing the percentage ownership of any other person. The information in the table below is based on information known to us or ascertained by us from public filings made by the shareholders.

|  | Shares beneficially owned |
Name of beneficial owner |  | Number |  | Percentage |
3% or Greater Shareholders: |  |  |  |  |
FMR LLC (1)(2) |  | 4,276,152 |  | 9.99 | %
T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. (1)(3) |  | 4,084,079 |  | 9.54 | %
Entities affiliated with Baker Bros. (1)(4) |  | 2,257,438 |  | 5.28 | %
Wellington Management Group LLP (1)(5) |  | 2,156,439 |  | 5.04 | %
Federated Investors, Inc. (1)(6) |  | 1,895,001 |  | 4.43 | %
Johnson & Johnson Innovation - JJDC, Inc (1)(7) |  | 1,766,899 |  | 4.13 | %
RTW Investments (1)(8) |  | 1,436,705 |  | 3.36 | %
The Vanguard Group (1)(9) |  | 1,418,173 |  | 3.31 | %
Baillie Gifford & Co. (1)(10) |  | 1,401,085 |  | 3.27 | %
Blackrock, Inc. (1)(11) |  | 1,290,201 |  | 3.02 | %
Directors and Executive Management: |  |  |  |  |
Tim Van Hauwermeiren(12) |  | 263,978 |  | * |
Peter Verhaeghe(13) |  | 39,029 |  | * |
David Lacey(14) |  | 45,554 |  | * |
Werner Lanthaler(15) |  | 34,860 |  | * |
Donald deBethizy(16) |  | 29,444 |  | * |
Pamela Klein(17) |  | 29,444 |  | * |
A.A. Rosenberg(18) |  | 19,444 |  | * |
James M. Daly(19) |  | 13,611 |  | * |
Eric Castaldi(20) |  | 140,423 |  | * |
Keith Woods(21) |  | 55,555 |  | * |
Hans de Haard(22) |  | 463,710 |  | 1.07 | %
Wim Parys(23) |  | 55,556 |  | * | %
Arjen Lemmen(24) |  | 34,211 |  | * |
Dirk Beeusaert(25) |  | 76,066 |  | * |
All directors and executive management as a group (14 persons)(26) |  | 1,300,885 |  | 2.96 | %

*Indicates beneficial ownership of less than 1% of the total outstanding ordinary shares.

| (1) |  | Based on the number of shares reported in, and at the time of, the most recent transparency notification.

| (2) |  | Based solely on (1) the most recent transparency notification filed with the AFM as of March 16, 2020 and (2) a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 7, 2020. Consists of 4,276,152 ordinary shares. Members of the Johnson family, including Abigail P. Johnson, are the predominant owners, directly or through trusts, of Series B voting common shares of FMR LLC, representing 49% of the voting power of FMR LLC. The Johnson family group and all other Series B shareholders have entered into a shareholders' voting agreement under which all Series B voting common shares will be voted in accordance with the majority vote of Series B voting common shares. Accordingly, through their ownership of voting common shares and the execution of the shareholders' voting agreement, members of the Johnson family may be deemed, under the Investment Company Act of 1940, to form a controlling group with respect to FMR LLC. Neither FMR LLC nor Abigail P. Johnson has the sole power to vote or direct the voting of the shares owned directly by the various investment companies registered under the Investment Company Act (“Fidelity Funds”) advised by Fidelity Management & Research Company (“FMR Co”), a wholly owned subsidiary of FMR LLC, which power resides with the Fidelity Funds' Boards of Trustees. Fidelity Management & Research Company carries out the voting of the shares under written guidelines established by the Fidelity Funds’ Boards of Trustees. The address for FMR LLC is 245 Summer Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02210.

166

Table of Contents

| (3) |  | Based solely on (1) the most recent transparency notification filed with the Netherlands Authority for the Financial Markets (the “AFM”) as of March 16, 2020 and (2) a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 14, 2020. Consists of 1,398 ordinary shares and 4,082,681 ADSs. T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. (“Price Associates”) does not serve as custodian of the assets of any of its clients; accordingly, in each instance only the client or the client's custodian or trustee bank has the right to receive dividends paid with respect to, and proceeds from the sale of, such securities. The ultimate power to direct the receipt of dividends paid with respect to, and the proceeds from the sale of, such securities, is vested in the individual and institutional clients which Price Associates serves as investment adviser. Any and all discretionary authority which has been delegated to Price Associates may be revoked in whole or in part at any time. Not more than 5% of the class of such securities is owned by any one client subject to the investment advice of Price Associates. With respect to securities owned by any one of the registered investment companies sponsored by Price Associates which it also serves as investment adviser, only the custodian for each of such funds has the right to receive dividends paid with respect to, and proceeds from the sale of, such securities. No other person is known to have such right, except that the shareholders of each such fund participate proportionately in any dividends and distributions so paid. The address for Price Associates is 100 East Pratt Street, Baltimore, MD 21202.

| (4) |  | Based solely on the most recent transparency notification filed with the AFM as of March 16, 2020. Consists of 319,227 ordinary shares and 1,938,211 ADSs. Other information regarding this shareholder’s beneficial ownership of our shares is not known to us or, to our knowledge, ascertainable from public filings.

| (5) |  | Based solely on the most recent transparency notification filed with the AFM as of March 16, 2020. Consists of 1,770,834 ordinary shares and 385,605 ADSs. Other information regarding this shareholder’s beneficial ownership of our shares is not known to us or, to our knowledge, ascertainable from public filings.

| (6) |  | Based solely on (1) the most recent transparency notification filed with the AFM as of March 16, 2020 and (2) a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on December 10, 2019. Consists of 1,522,200 ordinary shares and 372,801 ADSs. Represents shares beneficially owned by registered investment companies and separate accounts advised by subsidiaries of Federated Investors, Inc. that have been delegated the power to direct investment and power to vote the securities by the registered investment companies’ board of trustees or directors and by the separate accounts’ principals. All of the voting securities of Federated Investors, Inc. are held in the Voting Shares Irrevocable Trust, the trustees of which are Thomas R. Donahue, Rhodora J Donahue, and J. Christopher Donahue. The address of Federated Investors, Inc. is Federated Investors Tower, Pittsburgh, PA 15222-3779.

| (7) |  | Based solely on the most recent transparency notification filed with the AFM as of March 16, 2020. Consists of 1,766,899 ordinary shares. Other information regarding this shareholder’s beneficial ownership of our shares is not known to us or, to our knowledge, ascertainable from public filings.

| (8) |  | Based solely on the most recent transparency notification filed with the AFM as of March 16, 2020. Consists of 1,411,445 ordinary shares and 25,260 ADSs. Other information regarding this shareholder’s beneficial ownership of our shares is not known to us or, to our knowledge, ascertainable from public filings.

| (9) |  | Based solely on the most recent transparency notification filed with the AFM as of March 16, 2020. Consists of 1,418,173 ordinary shares. Other information regarding this shareholder’s beneficial ownership of our shares is not known to us or, to our knowledge, ascertainable from public filings.

| (10) |  | Based solely on the most recent transparency notification filed with the AFM as of March 16, 2020. Consists of 1,401,085 ordinary shares. Other information regarding this shareholder’s beneficial ownership of our shares is not known to us or, to our knowledge, ascertainable from public filings.

167

Table of Contents

| (11) |  | Based solely on the most recent transparency notification filed with the AFM as of March 16, 2020. Consists of 1,021,451 ordinary shares and 268,750 ADSs. Other information regarding this shareholder’s beneficial ownership of our shares is not known to us or, to our knowledge, ascertainable from public filings.

| (12) |  | Consists of 20,000 shares and 243,978 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (13) |  | Consists of 39,029 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (14) |  | Consists of 45,554 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (15) |  | Consists of 30,416 shares and 4,444 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (16) |  | Consists of 29,444 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (17) |  | Consists of 29,444 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (18) |  | Consists of 19,444 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (19) |  | Consists of 13,611 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (20) |  | Consists of 140,423 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (21) |  | Consists of 55,555 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (22) |  | Consists of 55,910 shares and 407,800 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (23) |  | Consists of 55,556 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

| (24) |  | Consists of 34,211 shares issuable upon the exerc.ise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020

| (25) |  | Consists of 76,066 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options that are immediately exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 16, 2020.

Each of our shareholders is entitled to one vote per ordinary share. None of the holders of our shares have different voting rights from other holders of shares. We are not aware of any arrangement that may, at a subsequent date, result in a change of control of our company.

As of March 16, 2020, we had one holder of record of our ADSs in the United States, which is Cede & Co., the nominee of The Depository Trust Company. This shareholder held in the aggregate 53.8% of the 42,791,076 ordinary shares outstanding as of March 16, 2020. The number of record holders in the United States is

168

Table of Contents

not representative of the number of beneficial holders nor is it representative of where such beneficial holders are resident since many of these ordinary shares were held by brokers or other nominees. As of March 16, 2020, assuming that all of our ordinary shares represented by ADSs are held by residents of the United States, we estimate that approximately 78% of our outstanding ordinary shares were held in the United States by approximately 177 institutional holders of record.

To our knowledge, and other than changes in percentage ownership as a result of the shares issued in connection with our initial and follow-on U.S. public offerings, there has been no significant change in the percentage ownership held by the major shareholders listed above, except as set forth below. On January 31, 2018, we received a transparency notification from Forbion Capital Fund II Coöperatief U.A. indicating that as a result of the sale of its entire position, its shareholding has decreased below the 3% notification threshold of argenx’s voting rights. Per its transparency notification dated January 10, 2018, Bank of America reported total shareholdings of over 6% of argenx’s voting rights. On March 14, 2018, we received a transparency notification from Bank of America Corporation indicating that as a result of the sale of nearly all of its position, its shareholding has decreased below the 3% notification threshold of argenx’s voting rights. On September 21, 2018, we received a transparency notification from Shire plc indicating that as a result of the sale of its shares, its shareholding has decreased below the 3% notification threshold of argenx’s voting rights. On January 24, 2019, we received a transparency notification from Perceptive Advisors LLC indicating that as a result of the increased number of argenx’s outstanding shares, its shareholding has decreased below the 3% notification threshold of argenx’s voting rights. On February 15, 2019, we received a transparency notification from LSP IV Management B.V. indicating that as a result of the sale of its shares, its shareholding has decreased below the 3% notification threshold of argenx’s voting rights.

B. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

Since January 1, 2014, there has not been, nor is there currently proposed, any material transaction or series of similar material transactions to which we were or are a party in which any of the members of our board of directors or senior management, holders of more than 10% of any class of our voting securities, or any member of the immediate family of any of the foregoing persons, had or will have a direct or indirect material interest, other than the compensation and shareholding arrangements we describe in the sections of this annual report titled “Item 6.B.—Compensation” and “Item 7.A.—Major Shareholders,” and the transactions we describe below.

Agreements with Our Executive Management

We have entered into a management agreement with Tim Van Hauwermeiren as our chief executive officer. The chief executive officer is our sole executive director. The key terms of his agreement are as follows:

|  | Tim Van Hauwermeiren
Base salary |  | € | 525,000
Cash bonus |  |  | maximum 55% of base salary based
|  |  | on previously determined bonus
|  |  | targets established by the
|  |  | non‑executive directors
Pension contributions(1) |  | € | 21,532
Duration |  |  | Indefinite

| (1) |  | Amounts shown represent pension contributions paid during the year‑ended December 31, 2019.

We may terminate Mr. Van Hauwermeiren’s services upon 18 months’ notice, or payment of 18 months’ pro‑rated base salary in lieu of notice. Mr. Van Hauwermeiren would be entitled to the same payment in lieu of notice in the event he terminated his services with us in circumstances in which it cannot reasonably be expected for him to continue providing services to us (and after our failure to remedy such conditions after being provided at least 14 days’ notice). Mr. Van Hauwermeiren would also be entitled to payment in lieu of notice in the event he terminated his services with us in certain cases of our failure to comply with obligations under applicable law or his

169

Table of Contents

agreement (and after our failure to remedy such non‑compliance, if non‑deliberate, after being provided at least 14 days’ notice). In these cases, there will be a full acceleration of the vesting of any outstanding stock options held by Mr. Van Hauwermeiren. There will be no notice period or payment in lieu of notice in certain cases of Mr. Van Hauwermeiren’s failure to comply with obligations under applicable law or his agreement.

Eric Castaldi, our Chief Financial Officer, has an employment contract with our subsidiary, argenx BV, for an indefinite term. His employment contract may be terminated at any time by us, subject to a notice period and a severance payment of at least 12 months.

Keith Woods, our Chief Operating Officer, has an employment contract with our subsidiary, argenx US Inc., for an indefinite term. His employment contract may be terminated at any time by us, subject to a notice period and a severance payment of at least 12 months.

Wim Parys, our Chief Medical Officer, has an employment contract with our subsidiary argenx BV, for an indef-inite term. His employment contract may be terminated at any time by us, subject to a notice period and a sev-erance payment of at least 12 months.

Hans de Haard, our Chief Scientific Officer, has an employment contract with our subsidiary, argenx BV, for an indefinite term. His employment contract may be terminated at any time by us, subject to a notice period and a severance payment of at least 12 months.

Arjen Lemmen, our VP Corporate Development & Strategy, has an employment contract with our subsidiary, argenx BV, for an indefinite term. His employment contract may be terminated at any time by us, subject to a notice period and a severance payment of at least 12 months.

Dirk Beeusaert, our General Counsel, has an employment contract with our subsidiary, argenx BV, for an indefinite term. His employment contract may be terminated at any time by us, subject to a notice period and a sev-erance payment of at least 12 months.

Indemnification Agreements

In connection with our initial U.S. public offering, we entered into indemnification agreements with each of our non‑executive directors and each member of our executive management. Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities Act may be permitted to non‑executive directors, officers or persons controlling us pursuant to the foregoing provisions, we have been informed that in the opinion of the SEC such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the Securities Act and is therefore unenforceable.

Transactions with Related Companies

Agreement with FairJourney Biologics LDA

FairJourney Biologics LDA, or FairJourney, is a fee‑for‑service company focused on antibody discovery and engineering services. FairJourney was founded in 2012 and, as compensation for their support with the formation of FairJourney, our chief executive officer and executive director Tim Van Hauwermeiren acquired shares representing 5% of the equity securities of FairJourney, and our chief scientific officer, Hans de Haard, acquired shares representing 20% of the equity securities of FairJourney. In July 2012, we entered into a license and exclusive option agreement with FairJourney, pursuant to which we granted FairJourney a worldwide, non‑exclusive license to our SIMPLE Antibody TM Platform to develop, manufacture and commercialize SIMPLE Antibodies to certain targets selected by FairJourney. Under the terms of the agreement, once FairJourney has advanced a product candidate discovered under the agreement to near proof‑of‑concept stage, we have the option to acquire patent rights generated by FairJourney specific to such product candidate along with a non‑exclusive license to additional FairJourney intellectual property useful for further development, manufacture, or commercialization of the product candidate. Upon exercising this option, we must pay FairJourney an option fee equal to two times the expenses incurred by FairJourney for advancing such product candidate through the option

170

Table of Contents

exercise date, and we are required to pay a specified royalty in the mid‑single digits on any sub‑licensing revenue received by us for such product candidate. Alternatively, if we elect not to exercise the option, FairJourney is required to pay us a specified royalty in the mid‑single digits on any sub‑licensing revenue received by FairJourney for such product candidate. In connection with the agreement, we acquired shares of FairJourney representing 15% of the fully‑diluted equity securities of FairJourney at the time of issuance. In December 2017, the company and executive director Tim Van Hauwermeiren sold their respective shareholding in FairJourney Biologics LDA, and thus FairJourney Biologics LDA is no longer a related company. In January 2020, the stake held by Hans de Haard in FairJourney was sold. This means that at the date of this annual report, FairJourney LDA no longer qualifies as related party.

Services Provided by VVGB Advocaten‑Avocats

In relation to the initial public offering of our shares on Euronext Brussels in July 2014, VVGB Advocaten‑Avocats provided legal services to us. Peter K.M. Verhaeghe, one of our non‑executive directors, is the managing partner of VVGB Advocaten‑Avocats.

Related Party Transactions Policy

In connection with our initial U.S. public offering, we entered into a related party transaction policy.

C. INTERESTS OF EXPERTS AND COUNSEL

Not applicable.

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

A. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS AND OTHER FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Consolidated financial statements

Our consolidated financial statements are appended at the end of this annual report, starting at page F-1, and incorporated herein by reference.

Legal proceedings

From time to time we may become involved in legal, governmental or arbitration proceedings or be subject to claims arising in the ordinary course of our business. We are not presently a party to any legal, governmental or arbitration proceeding. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors.

Dividend Distribution Policy

We have not paid or declared any cash dividends on our ordinary shares, and we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Even if future operations lead to significant levels of distributable profits, we currently intend that any earnings will be reinvested in our business and that cash dividends will not be paid until we have an established revenue stream to support continuing cash dividends. In addition, payment of any future dividends to shareholders would be subject to shareholder approval at our General Meeting, upon proposal of the board of directors, which proposal would be subject to the approval of the majority of the non‑executive directors after taking into account various factors including our business prospects, cash requirements, financial performance and new product development. In addition, payment of future cash dividends may be made only if our shareholders’ equity exceeds the sum of our paid‑in and called‑up share capital plus the reserves required to be maintained by Dutch law or by our Articles of Association.

171

Table of Contents

If we complete our possible redomiciliation, under Belgian corporate law, we may pay dividends only up to an amount equal to the excess of our shareholders’ equity over the sum of (i) paid‑up or called‑up share capital, and (ii) reserves not available for distribution pursuant to law or our Belgian Articles of Association, based on the most recent statutory audited financial statements, prepared in accordance with the generally accepted accounting principles in Belgium, or Belgian GAAP. In addition, under Belgian law, prior to distributing dividends, we must allocate an amount of 5% of our annual net profit on an unconsolidated basis to a legal reserve in our unconsolidated financial statements until such reserve equals 10% of our share capital. If Belgian corporate law is amended, these and/or other provisions may contain similar restrictions.

B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES

Please see Note 33 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report for details regarding events subsequent to the reporting period.

ITEM 9. THE OFFER AND LISTING

A. OFFER AND LISTING DETAILS

Our ADSs have been listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “ARGX” since May 18, 2017. Prior to that date, there was no public trading market for our ADSs. Our ordinary shares have been trading on Euronext Brussels under the symbol “ARGX” since July 2014. Prior to that date, there was no public trading market for our ADSs or our ordinary shares. Our initial U.S. public offering in May 2017 was priced at $17.00 per ADS.

B. PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION

Not applicable.

C. MARKETS

The ADSs have been listed on NASDAQ under the symbol “ARGX” since May 18, 2017, and our ordinary shares have been listed on Euronext Brussels under the symbol “ARGX” since July 2014.

D. SELLING SHAREHOLDERS

Not applicable.

E. DILUTION

Not applicable.

F. EXPENSES OF THE ISSUE

Not applicable.

ITEM 10. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

A. SHARE CAPITAL

Not applicable.

172

Table of Contents

B. MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION

The information set forth in our Registration Statement on Form F-3ASR (File No. 333-225370), automatically effective upon filing with the SEC on June 1, 2018, under the heading “Description of Share Capital” as supplemented by the section titled “Description of Share Capital” in the final prospectus supplement on Form 424(b)(5) dated November 6, 2019 filed with the SEC on November 8, 2019 is incorporated herein by reference.

C. MATERIAL CONTRACTS

For additional information on our material contracts, please see the sections of this annual report titled “Item 4—Information on the Company,” “Item 7.A.—Major Shareholders,” and “Item 7.B.—Related Party Transactions.”

D. EXCHANGE CONTROLS

Pursuant to Dutch law, there are no exchange controls applicable to the transfer to persons outside of the Netherlands of dividends or other distributions with respect to, or of the proceeds from the sale of, shares of a Dutch company.

Pursuant to Dutch law, there are no exchange controls applicable to our import or export of capital, including the availability of cash and cash equivalents to us as a Dutch company.

E. TAXATION

Certain Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations to U.S. Holders

The following is a summary of certain material U.S. federal income tax considerations relating to the ownership and disposition of ADSs by a U.S. holder (as defined below). This summary addresses only the U.S. federal income tax considerations for U.S. holders that hold ADSs as capital assets for U.S. federal income tax purposes. This summary does not address all U.S. federal income tax matters that may be relevant to a particular U.S. holder. This summary does not address tax considerations applicable to a holder of ADSs that may be subject to special tax rules including, without limitation, the following:

| · |  | banks, financial institutions or insurance companies;

| · |  | brokers, dealers or traders in securities, currencies, commodities, or notional principal contracts;

| · |  | tax-exempt entities or organizations, including an “individual retirement account” or “Roth IRA” as defined in Section 408 or 408A of the Code (as defined below), respectively;

| · |  | real estate investment trusts, regulated investment companies or grantor trusts;

| · |  | persons that hold the ADSs as part of a “hedging,” “integrated” or “conversion” transaction or as a position in a “straddle” for U.S. federal income tax purposes;

| · |  | partnerships (including entities or arrangements classified as partnerships for U.S. federal income tax purposes) or other pass-through entities, or persons that will hold the ADSs through such an entity;

| · |  | certain former citizens or long-term residents of the United States;

| · |  | holders that own directly, indirectly, or through attribution 10% or more of the voting power or value of our ordinary shares and ADSs; and

173

Table of Contents

| · |  | holders that have a “functional currency” for U.S. federal income tax purposes other than the U.S. dollar.

Further, this summary does not address U.S. federal estate, gift, or alternative minimum tax considerations, any election to apply Section 1400Z-2 of the Code to gains recognized with respect to ADSs, or any U.S. state, local, or non-U.S. tax considerations of the ownership and disposition of ADSs.

This description is based on the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code; existing, proposed and temporary U.S. Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, administrative and judicial interpretations thereof; and the income tax treaties between the Netherlands and the United States, and Belgium and the United States, in each case as in effect and available on the date hereof. All the foregoing is subject to change, which change could apply retroactively, and to differing interpretations, all of which could affect the tax considerations described below. There can be no assurances that the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, or the IRS, will not take a contrary or different position concerning the tax consequences of the ownership and disposition of our ordinary shares or that such a position would not be sustained. Holders should consult their own tax advisors concerning the U.S. federal, state, local and non-U.S. tax consequences of owning and disposing of ADSs in their particular circumstances.

For the purposes of this summary, a “U.S. holder” is a beneficial owner of ADSs that is (or is treated as), for U.S. federal income tax purposes:

| · |  | an individual who is a citizen or resident of the United States;

| · |  | a corporation, or other entity that is treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, created or organized in or under the laws of the United States, any state thereof, or the District of Columbia;

| · |  | an estate, the income of which is subject to U.S. federal income taxation regardless of its source; or

| · |  | a trust, if a court within the United States is able to exercise primary supervision over its administration and one or more U.S. persons have the authority to control all of the substantial decisions of such trust or have a valid election in effect under applicable U.S. Treasury Regulations to be treated as a United States person.

If a partnership (or any other entity or arrangement treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes) holds ADSs, the U.S. federal income tax consequences relating to an investment in those ADSs will depend in part upon the status of the partner and the activities of the partnership. Such a partner or partnership should consult its tax advisor regarding the U.S. federal income tax considerations of owning and disposing of ADSs in its particular circumstances.

In general, a U.S. holder who owns ADSs will be treated as the beneficial owner of the underlying shares represented by those ADSs for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, no gain or loss will generally be recognized if a U.S. holder exchanges ADSs for the underlying shares represented by those ADSs.

As indicated below, this discussion is subject to U.S. federal income tax rules applicable to a “passive foreign investment company,” or a PFIC, discussed under “—Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations.”

Persons considering an investment in the ADSs should consult their own tax advisors as to the particular tax consequences applicable to them relating to the ownership and disposition of ADSs, including the applicability of U.S. federal, state and local tax laws and non-U.S. tax laws.

174

Table of Contents

Distributions. Although we do not currently plan to pay dividends, and subject to the discussion under “—Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations” below, the gross amount of any distribution (before reduction for any amounts withheld in respect of Dutch or Belgian withholding tax) actually or constructively received by a U.S. holder with respect to ADSs will be taxable to the U.S. holder as a dividend to the extent of the U.S. holder’s pro rata share of our current and accumulated earnings and profits as determined under U.S. federal income tax principles. Distributions in excess of earnings and profits will be non-taxable to the U.S. holder to the extent of, and will be applied against and reduce, the U.S. holder’s adjusted tax basis in ADSs. Distributions in excess of earnings and profits and such adjusted tax basis will generally be taxable to the U.S. holder as either long-term or short-term capital gain depending upon whether the U.S. holder has held the ADSs for more than one year as of the time such distribution is received. However, since we do not calculate our earnings and profits under U.S. federal income tax principles, it is expected that any distribution will be reported as a dividend, even if that distribution would otherwise be treated as a non-taxable return of capital or as capital gain under the rules described above. Non-corporate U.S. holders may qualify for the preferential rates of taxation with respect to dividends on ADSs applicable to long-term capital gains (i.e., gains from the sale of capital assets held for more than one year) applicable to qualified dividend income (as discussed below) if we are a “qualified foreign corporation” and certain other requirements (discussed below) are met. A non-U.S. corporation (other than a corporation that is a PFIC for the taxable year in which the dividend is paid or the preceding taxable year) generally will be considered to be a qualified foreign corporation with respect to any dividend it pays on shares which are readily tradable on an established securities market in the United States. We have been approved to list our ordinary shares on the Nasdaq Global Select Market, which is an established securities market in the United States, and we expect our ADSs to be readily tradable on the Nasdaq Global Select Market. However, there can be no assurance that the ADSs will be considered readily tradable on an established securities market in the United States in later years. Therefore, subject to the discussion under “—Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations” below, such dividends will generally be “qualified dividend income” in the hands of non-corporate U.S. holders, provided that a holding period requirement (more than 60 days of ownership, without protection from the risk of loss, during the 121-day period beginning 60 days before the ex-dividend date) and certain other requirements are met. The dividends will not be eligible for the dividends-received deduction generally allowed to corporate U.S. holders.

A U.S. holder generally may claim the amount of any Dutch or Belgian withholding tax as either a deduction from gross income or a credit against U.S. federal income tax liability. However, the foreign tax credit is subject to numerous complex limitations that must be determined and applied on an individual basis. Generally, the credit cannot exceed the proportionate share of a U.S. holder’s U.S. federal income tax liability that such U.S. holder’s taxable income bears to such U.S. holder’s worldwide taxable income. In applying this limitation, a U.S. holder’s various items of income and deduction must be classified, under complex rules, as either “foreign source” or “U.S. source.” In addition, this limitation is calculated separately with respect to specific categories of income. The amount of a distribution with respect to the ADSs that is treated as a “dividend” may be lower for U.S. federal income tax purposes than it is for Dutch or Belgian income tax purposes, potentially resulting in a reduced foreign tax credit for the U.S. holder. Furthermore, Dutch or Belgian income taxes withheld in excess of the rate applicable under the income tax treaty between the Netherlands or Belgium and the United States will not be eligible for credit against U.S. holders’ federal income tax liability. Each U.S. holder should consult its own tax advisors regarding the foreign tax credit rules.

Sale, Exchange or Other Taxable Disposition of ADSs. A U.S. holder will generally recognize gain or loss for U.S. federal income tax purposes upon the sale, exchange or other taxable disposition of ADSs in an amount equal to the difference between the U.S. dollar value of the amount realized from such sale or exchange and the U.S. holder’s tax basis for those ADSs. Subject to the discussion under “—Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations” below, this gain or loss will generally be a capital gain or loss. The adjusted tax basis in ADSs generally will be equal to the cost of such ADSs. Capital gain from the sale, exchange or other taxable disposition of ADSs of a non-corporate U.S. holder is generally eligible for a preferential rate of taxation applicable to capital gains, if the non-corporate U.S. holder’s holding period determined at the time of such sale, exchange or other taxable disposition for such ADSs exceeds one year (i.e., such gain is long-term taxable gain). The deductibility of capital losses for U.S. federal income tax purposes is subject to limitations. Any such gain or

175

Table of Contents

loss that a U.S. holder recognizes generally will be treated as U.S. source income or loss for foreign tax credit limitation purposes.

Medicare Tax. Certain U.S. holders that are individuals, estates or trusts are subject to a 3.8% tax on all or a portion of their “net investment income,” which may include all or a portion of their dividend income and net gains from the disposition of ADSs. Each U.S. holder that is an individual, estate or trust is urged to consult its tax advisors regarding the applicability of the Medicare tax to its income and gains in respect of its investment in ADSs.

Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations. If we are classified as a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC, for any taxable year, a U.S. holder would be subject to special rules generally intended to reduce or eliminate any benefits from the deferral of U.S. federal income tax that a U.S. holder could derive from investing in a non-U.S. company that does not distribute all of its earnings on a current basis.

A corporation organized outside the United States generally will be a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes for any taxable year in which, after applying certain look-through rules, either: (i) at least 75% of its gross income is “passive income” or (ii) at least 50% of the average quarterly value of its total gross assets (for which purpose the total value of our assets may be determined in part by reference to the market value of our ordinary shares and ADSs, which is subject to change) is attributable to assets that produce “passive income” or are held for the production of “passive income.”

Passive income for this purpose generally includes dividends, interest, royalties, rents, gains from commodities and securities transactions, the excess of gains over losses from the disposition of assets which produce passive income, and includes amounts derived by reason of the temporary investment of cash, including the funds raised in offerings of the ADSs. If a non-U.S. corporation owns directly or indirectly at least 25% by value of the stock of another corporation, the non-U.S. corporation is treated for purposes of the PFIC tests as owning its proportionate share of the assets of the other corporation and as receiving directly its proportionate share of the other corporation’s income for purposes of the PFIC tests. If we are a PFIC for any year with respect to which a U.S. holder owns ADSs, we will continue to be treated as a PFIC with respect to such U.S. holder in all succeeding years during which the U.S. holder owns ADSs, regardless of whether we continue to meet the tests described above.

Whether we are a PFIC for any taxable year will depend on the composition of our income and the projected composition and estimated fair market values of our assets in each year, and because this is a factual determination made annually after the end of each taxable year, there can be no assurance that we will not be considered a PFIC for any taxable year. The market value of our assets may be determined in large part by reference to the market price of our ordinary shares and ADSs, which is likely to fluctuate after a public offering. Based on the foregoing, we do not anticipate that we will be a PFIC for the 2019 taxable year based upon the expected value of our assets, including any goodwill, and the expected composition of our income and assets, however, as previously mentioned, we cannot provide any assurances regarding our PFIC status for the current or any prior or future taxable years.

If we are a PFIC, for any taxable year, then unless you make one of the elections described below, a special tax regime will apply to both (a) any “excess distribution” by us to you (generally, your ratable portion of distributions in any year which are greater than 125% of the average annual distribution received by you in the shorter of the three preceding years or your holding period for ADSs) and (b) any gain realized on the sale or other disposition of ADSs. Under this regime, any excess distribution and realized gain will be treated as ordinary income and will be subject to tax as if (a) the excess distribution or gain had been realized ratably over your holding period, (b) the amount deemed realized in each year had been subject to tax in each year of that holding period at the highest marginal rate for such year (other than income allocated to the current period or any taxable period before we became a PFIC, which would be subject to tax at the U.S. holder’s regular ordinary income rate for the current year and would not be subject to the interest charge discussed below), and (c) the interest charge generally applicable to underpayments of tax had been imposed on the taxes deemed to have been payable in those

176

Table of Contents

years. In addition, dividend distributions made to you will not qualify for the lower rates of taxation applicable to long-term capital gains discussed above under “—Distributions.”

Certain elections exist that would result in an alternative treatment (such as mark-to-market treatment) of ADSs. If a U.S. holder makes the mark-to- market election, the U.S. holder generally will recognize as ordinary income any excess of the fair market value of the ADSs at the end of each taxable year over their adjusted tax basis, and will recognize an ordinary loss in respect of any excess of the adjusted tax basis of the ADSs over their fair market value at the end of the taxable year (but only to the extent of the net amount of income previously included as a result of the mark-to-market election). If a U.S. holder makes the election, the U.S. holder’s tax basis in ADSs will be adjusted to reflect these income or loss amounts. Any gain recognized on the sale or other disposition of the ADSs in a year when we are a PFIC will be treated as ordinary income and any loss will be treated as an ordinary loss (but only to the extent of the net amount of income previously included as a result of the mark-to-market election). The mark-to-market election is available only if we are a PFIC and the ADSs are “regularly traded” on a “qualified exchange.” ADSs will be treated as “regularly traded” in any calendar year in which more than a de minimis quantity of ADSs are traded on a qualified exchange on at least 15 days during each calendar quarter (subject to the rule that trades that have as one of their principal purposes the meeting of the trading requirement as disregarded). Nasdaq is a qualified exchange for this purpose and, consequently, if the ADSs are regularly traded, the mark-to-market election will generally be available to a U.S. holder.

If we are a PFIC for any year during which a U.S. holder holds ADSs, we must generally continue to be treated as a PFIC by that U.S. holder for all succeeding years during which the U.S. holder holds the ADSs, unless we cease to meet the requirements for PFIC status and the U.S. holder makes a “deemed sale” election with respect to the ADSs. If such election is made, the U.S. holder will be deemed to have sold the ADSs it holds at their fair market value on the last day of the last taxable year in which we qualified as a PFIC, and any gain from such deemed sale would be subject to the consequences applicable to sales of PFIC shares described above. After the deemed sale election, the U.S. holder’s ADSs with respect to which the deemed sale election was made will not be treated as shares in a PFIC unless we subsequently become a PFIC.

The tax consequences that would apply if we were a PFIC would also be different from those described above if a U.S. holder were able to make a valid “qualified electing fund,” or QEF, election. However, we do not currently intend to provide the information necessary for U.S. holders to make a QEF election if we were treated as a PFIC for any taxable year and prospective investors should assume that a QEF election will not be available. U.S. holders should consult their tax advisors to determine whether any of these above elections would be available and if so, what the consequences of the alternative treatments would be in their particular circumstances.

If we are determined to be a PFIC, the general tax treatment for U.S. holders described in this section would apply to indirect distributions and gains deemed to be realized by U.S. holders in respect of any of our subsidiaries that also may be determined to be PFICs.

If a U.S. holder owns ADSs during any taxable year in which we are a PFIC, the U.S. holder generally will be required to file an IRS Form 8621 (Information Return by a Shareholder of a Passive Foreign Investment Company or Qualified Electing Fund) with respect to the company, generally with the U.S. holder’s federal income tax return for that year. If our company were a PFIC for a given taxable year, then you should consult your tax advisor concerning your annual filing requirements.

The U.S. federal income tax rules relating to PFICs are complex. Prospective U.S. investors are urged to consult their own tax advisors with respect to the ownership and disposition of ADSs, the consequences to them of an investment in a PFIC, any elections available with respect to our ordinary shares and the IRS information reporting obligations with respect to the ownership and disposition of the ADSs.

Backup Withholding and Information Reporting. U.S. holders generally will be subject to information reporting requirements with respect to dividends on ADSs and on the proceeds from the sale, exchange or disposition of the ADSs that are paid within the United States or through U.S.- related financial intermediaries, unless the U.S. holder is an “exempt recipient.” In addition, U.S. holders may be subject to backup withholding on

177

Table of Contents

such payments, unless the U.S. holder provides a correct taxpayer identification number and a duly executed IRS Form W-9 or otherwise establishes an exemption. Backup withholding is not an additional tax, and the amount of any backup withholding will be allowed as a credit against a U.S. holder’s U.S. federal income tax liability and may entitle such holder to a refund, provided that the required information is timely furnished to the IRS.

Foreign Asset Reporting. Certain U.S. holders who are individuals and certain entities controlled by individuals may be required to report information relating to an interest in ADSs, subject to certain exceptions (including an exception for shares held in accounts maintained by U.S. financial institutions) by filing IRS Form 8938 (Statement of Specified Foreign Financial Assets) with their federal income tax return. U.S. holders are urged to consult their tax advisors regarding their information reporting obligations, if any, with respect to their ownership and disposition of the ADSs.

THE DISCUSSION ABOVE IS A GENERAL SUMMARY. IT DOES NOT COVER ALL TAX MATTERS THAT MAY BE OF IMPORTANCE TO A PROSPECTIVE INVESTOR. EACH PROSPECTIVE INVESTOR IS URGED TO CONSULT ITS OWN TAX ADVISOR ABOUT THE TAX CONSEQUENCES TO IT OF AN INVESTMENT IN THE ADSs IN LIGHT OF THE INVESTOR’S OWN CIRCUMSTANCES.

Dutch Tax Consequences

The following summary outlines certain Dutch tax consequences in connection with the acquisition, ownership and disposal of the ADSs. All references in this summary to the Netherlands and Dutch law are to the European part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and its law, respectively, only. The summary does not purport to present any comprehensive or complete picture of all Dutch tax aspects that could be of relevance to the acquisition, ownership and disposal of the ADSs by a (prospective) holder of the ADSs who may be subject to special tax treatment under applicable law. The summary is based on the tax laws and practice of the Netherlands as in effect on the date of this annual report, which are subject to changes that could prospectively or retrospectively affect the Dutch tax consequences.

For purposes of Dutch income and corporate income tax, shares, or certain other assets, which may include depositary receipts in respect of shares, legally owned by a third party such as a trustee, foundation or similar entity or arrangement, or a Third Party, may under certain circumstances have to be allocated to the (deemed) settlor, grantor or similar originator, or the Settlor, or, upon the death of the Settlor, his/her beneficiaries, or the Beneficiaries, in proportion to their entitlement to the estate of the Settlor of such trust or similar arrangement, or the Separated Private Assets.

The summary does not address the tax consequences of a holder of the ADSs who is an individual and who has a substantial interest (aanmerkelijk belang) in the company. Generally, a holder of the ADSs will have a substantial interest in the company if such holder of the ADSs, whether alone or together with his spouse or partner and/or certain other close relatives, holds directly or indirectly, or as Settlor or Beneficiary of Separated Private Assets (i) (x) the ownership of, (y) certain other rights, such as usufruct, over, or (z) rights to acquire (whether or not already issued), shares (including the ADSs) representing 5% or more of the total issued and outstanding capital (or the issued and outstanding capital of any class of shares) of the company or (ii) (x) the ownership of, or (y) certain other rights, such as usufruct over, profit participating certificates (winstbewijzen) that relate to 5% or more of the annual profit of the company or to 5% or more of the liquidation proceeds of the company.

In addition, a holder of the ADSs has a substantial interest in the company if he, whether alone or together with his spouse or partner and/or certain other close relatives, has the ownership of, or other rights over, shares, or depositary receipts in respect of shares, in, or profit certificates issued by, the company that represent less than 5% of the relevant aggregate that either (a) qualified as part of a substantial interest as set forth above and where shares, or depositary receipts in respect of shares, profit certificates and/or rights there over have been, or are deemed to have been, partially disposed of, or (b) have been acquired as part of a transaction that qualified for non-recognition of gain treatment.

178

Table of Contents

This summary does not address the tax consequences of a holder of our ordinary shares who:

| (a) |  | receives income or realizes capital gains in connection with his or her employment activities or in his/her capacity as (former) board member and/or (former) supervisory board member; or

| (b) |  | is a resident of any non-European part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

PROSPECTIVE HOLDERS OF THE ADSs SHOULD CONSULT THEIR OWN PROFESSIONAL ADVISER WITH RESPECT TO THE TAX CONSEQUENCES OF ANY ACQUISITION, OWNERSHIP OR DISPOSAL OF THE ADSs IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

Dividend Withholding Tax

General

The company is generally required to withhold dividend withholding tax imposed by the Netherlands at a rate of 15% on dividends distributed by the company in respect of our ordinary shares underlying the ADSs. The expression “dividends distributed by the company” as used herein includes, but is not limited to:

| (a) |  | distributions in cash or in kind, deemed and constructive distributions and repayments of paid-in capital (“gestort kapitaal”) not recognized for Dutch dividend withholding tax purposes;

| (b) |  | liquidation proceeds, proceeds of redemption of our ordinary shares or, as a rule, consideration for the repurchase of our ordinary shares by the company in excess of the average paid-in capital recognized for Dutch dividend withholding tax purposes;

| (c) |  | the par value of our ordinary shares issued to a holder of our ordinary shares or an increase of the par value of our ordinary shares, to the extent that it does not appear that a contribution, recognized for Dutch dividend withholding tax purposes, has been made or will be made; and

| (d) |  | partial repayment of paid-in capital, recognized for Dutch dividend withholding tax purposes, if and to the extent that there are net profits (zuivere winst), unless (i) the shareholders at the General Meeting have resolved in advance to make such repayment and (ii) the par value of our ordinary shares concerned has been reduced by an equal amount by way of an amendment of the articles of association.

Holders of the ADSs Resident in the Netherlands

A holder of the ADSs that is resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands is generally entitled, subject to the anti-dividend stripping rules described below, to a full credit against its (corporate) income tax liability, or a full refund, of the Dutch dividend withholding tax. The same generally applies to holders of the ADSs that are neither resident nor deemed to be resident in the Netherlands if the ADSs are attributable to a permanent establishment in the Netherlands of such non-resident holder.

Holders of the ADSs Resident Outside the Netherlands

A holder of the ADSs that is resident in a country with which the Netherlands has a double taxation convention in effect, may, depending on the terms of such double taxation convention and subject to the anti-dividend stripping rules described below, be eligible for a full or partial exemption from, or full or partial refund of, Dutch dividend withholding tax on dividends received.

A holder of the ADSs, that is a legal entity (a) resident in (i) a Member State of the European Union, (ii) Iceland, Norway or Liechtenstein, or (iii) a country with which the Netherlands has concluded a tax treaty that includes an article on dividends and (b) that is in its state of residence under the terms of a double taxation

179

Table of Contents

agreement concluded with a third state, not considered to be resident for tax purposes in a country with which the Netherlands has not concluded a tax treaty that includes an article on dividends (not being a Member State of the European Union, Iceland, Norway or Liechtenstein), is generally entitled, subject to the anti-abuse rules and the anti-dividend stripping rules described below, to a full exemption from Dutch dividend withholding tax on dividends received if it holds an interest of at least 5% (in shares or, in certain cases, in voting rights) in the company or if it holds an interest of less than 5%, in either case where, had the holder of the ADSs been a Dutch resident, it would have had the benefit of the participation exemption (this may include a situation where another related party holds an interest of 5% or more in the company).

The full exemption from Dutch dividend withholding tax on dividends received by a holder of our ordinary shares, that is a legal entity (a) resident in (i) a Member State of the European Union, (ii) Iceland, Norway or Liechtenstein, or (iii) a country with which the Netherlands has concluded a tax treaty that includes an article on dividends is not granted if the interest held by such holder (i) is held with the avoidance of Dutch dividend withholding tax of another person as (one of) the main purpose(s) and (ii) forms part of an artificial structure or series of structures (such as structures which are not put into place for valid business reasons reflecting economic reality).

A holder of the ADSs, that is an entity resident in (i) a Member State of the European Union, or (ii) Iceland, Norway or Liechtenstein, or (iii) in a jurisdiction which has an arrangement for the exchange of tax information with the Netherlands (and such holder as described under (iii) holds the ADSs as a portfolio investment, i.e., such holding is not acquired with a view to the establishment or maintenance of lasting and direct economic links between the holder of the ADSs and the company and does not allow the holder of the ADSs to participate effectively in the management or control of the company), which is exempt from tax in its country of residence, and that would have been exempt from Dutch corporate income tax if it had been a resident of the Netherlands, is generally entitled, subject to the anti-dividend stripping rules described below, to a full refund of Dutch dividend withholding tax on dividends received. This full refund will in general benefit certain foreign pension funds, government agencies and certain government controlled commercial entities.

According to the anti-dividend stripping rules, no exemption, reduction, credit or refund of Dutch dividend withholding tax will be granted if the recipient of the dividend paid by the company is not considered the beneficial owner (uiteindelijk gerechtigde) of the dividend as defined in these rules. A recipient of a dividend is not considered the beneficial owner of the dividend if, as a consequence of a combination of transactions, (i) a person (other than the holder of the dividend coupon), directly or indirectly, partly or wholly benefits from the dividend, (ii) such person directly or indirectly retains or acquires a comparable interest in the ADSs, and (iii) such person is entitled to a less favorable exemption, refund or credit of dividend withholding tax than the recipient of the dividend distribution. The term “combination of transactions” includes transactions that have been entered into in the anonymity of a regulated stock market, the sole acquisition of one or more dividend coupons and the establishment of short-term rights or enjoyment on the ADSs (e.g., usufruct).

Holders of the ADSs Resident in the United States

Dividends distributed by the company to U.S. resident holders of the ADSs that are eligible for benefits under the Convention between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the United States of America for the avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes and Income, dated December 18, 1992 as amended by the protocol of March 8, 2004, or the U.S. Tax Treaty, generally will be entitled to a reduced dividend withholding tax rate of 5% in case of certain U.S. corporate shareholders owning at least 10% of the company’s total voting power. Certain U.S. pension funds and tax-exempt organizations may qualify for a complete exemption from Dutch dividend withholding tax.

Under the U.S. Tax Treaty such benefits are generally available to U.S. residents if such resident is the beneficial owner of the dividends, provided that such shareholder does not have an enterprise or an interest in an enterprise that is, in whole or in part, carried on through a permanent establishment or permanent representative in the Netherlands and to which enterprise or part of an enterprise the ADSs are attributable. A person may, however, not claim the benefits of the U.S. Tax Treaty if such person’s entitlement to such benefits is limited by the provisions of Article 26 (the limitation on benefits provision) of the U.S. Tax Treaty. The reduced dividend

180

Table of Contents

withholding tax rate can generally be applied at source upon the distribution of the dividends, provided that the proper forms have been filed in advance of the distribution. In the case of certain tax-exempt organizations, as a general rule, the so-called refund method applies; only when certain administrative conditions have been fulfilled may such tax-exempt organization use the exemption method.

Taxes on Income and Capital Gains

Holders of the ADSs Resident in the Netherlands: Individuals

A holder of the ADSs, who is an individual resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands will be subject to regular Dutch income tax on the income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs by the holder thereof, if:

| (a) |  | such holder of the ADSs has an enterprise or an interest in an enterprise, to which enterprise the ADSs are attributable; and/or

| (b) |  | such income or capital gain forms “a benefit from miscellaneous activities” (“resultaat uit overige werkzaamheden”) which, for instance, would be the case if the activities with respect to the ADSs exceed “normal active asset management” (“normaal, actief vermogensbeheer”) or if income and gains are derived from the holding, whether directly or indirectly, of (a combination of) shares, debt claims or other rights (together, a “lucrative interest” (lucratief belang)) that the holder thereof has acquired under such circumstances that such income and gains are intended to be remuneration for work or services performed by such holder (or a related person), whether within or outside an employment relation, where such lucrative interest provides the holder thereof, economically speaking, with certain benefits that have a relation to the relevant work or services.

If either of the abovementioned conditions (a) or (b) applies, income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs will in general be subject to Dutch income tax at the progressive rates up to 51.95%.

If the abovementioned conditions (a) and (b) do not apply, a holder of the ADSs who is an individual, resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands will not be subject to taxes on income and capital gains in the Netherlands. Instead, such individual is generally taxed at a flat rate of 30% on deemed income from “savings and investments” (“sparen en beleggen”), which deemed income is determined on the basis of the amount included in the individual’s “yield basis” (“rendementsgrondslag”) at the beginning of the calendar year (minus a tax-free threshold). For the 2018 tax year, the deemed income derived from savings and investments will amount to 2.02% of the individual’s yield basis up to €70,800, 4.33% of the individual’s yield basis exceeding €70,800 up to and including €978,000 and 5.38% of the individual’s yield basis in excess of €978,000. The tax-free threshold for 2018 is €30,000.

Holders of the ADSs Resident in the Netherlands: Corporate Entities

A holder of the ADSs that is resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands for corporate income tax purposes, and that is:

| · |  | a c orporation;

| · |  | another entity with a capital divided into shares;

| · |  | a coop erative (association); or

| · |  | another legal entity that has an enterprise or an interest in an enterprise to which the ADSs are attributable,

181

Table of Contents

but which is not:

| · |  | a qualifyi ng pension fund;

| · |  | a qualifying investment fund (fiscale beleggingsinstelling) or a qualifying exempt investment institution (vrijgestelde beleggingsinstelling); or

| · |  | another en tity exempt from corporate income tax,

will in general be subject to regular corporate income tax, generally levied at a rate of 25% (20% over profits up to €200,000) over income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs, unless, and to the extent that, the participation exemption (deelnemingsvrijstelling) applies.

Holders of the ADSs Resident Outside the Netherlands: Individuals

A holder of the ADSs who is an individual, not resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands will not be subject to any Dutch taxes on income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs (other than the dividend withholding tax described above), unless:

| (a) |  | such holder has an enterprise or an interest in an enterprise that is, in whole or in part, carried on through a permanent establishment (vaste inrichting) or a permanent representative (vaste vertegenwoordiger) in the Netherlands and to which enterprise or part of an enterprise, as the case may be, the ADSs are attributable; or

| (b) |  | such income or capital gain forms a “benefit from miscellaneous activities in the Netherlands” (“resultaat uit overige werkzaamheden in Nederland”) which would for instance be the case if the activities in the Netherlands with respect to the ADSs exceed “normal active asset management” (“normaal, actief vermogensbeheer” or if such income and gains are derived from the holding, whether directly or indirectly, of (a combination of) shares, debt claims or other rights (together, a “lucrative interest” (“lucratief belang”)) that the holder thereof has acquired under such circumstances that such income and gains are intended to be remuneration for work or services performed by such holder (or a related person), in whole or in part, in the Netherlands, whether within or outside an employment relation, where such lucrative interest provides the holder thereof, economically speaking, with certain benefits that have a relation to the relevant work or services.

If either of the abovementioned conditions (a) or (b) applies, income or capital gains in respect of dividends distributed by the company or in respect of any gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs will in general be subject to Dutch income tax at the progressive rates up to 51.95%.

Holders of the ADSs Resident Outside the Netherlands: Legal and Other Entities

A holder of the ADSs, that is a legal entity, another entity with a capital divided into shares, an association, a foundation or a fund or trust, not resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands for corporate income tax purposes, will not be subject to any Dutch taxes on income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs (other than the dividend withholding tax described above), unless:

| (a) |  | such holder has an enterprise or an interest in an enterprise that is, in whole or in part, carried on through a permanent establishment (vaste inrichting) or a permanent representative (vaste vertegenwoordiger) in the Netherlands and to which enterprise or part of an enterprise, as the case may be, the ADSs are attributable; or

| (b) |  | such holder has a substantial interest (aanmerkelijk belang) in the company, that (i) is held with the avoidance of Dutch income tax of another person as (one of) the main purpose(s) and (ii) forms part

182

Table of Contents

of an artificial structure or series of structures (such as structures which are not put into place for valid business reasons reflecting economic reality).

If one of the abovementioned conditions applies, income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs will, in general, be subject to Dutch regular corporate income tax, levied at a rate of 25% (20% over profits up to €200,000), unless, and to the extent that, with respect to a holder as described under (a), the participation exemption (deelnemingsvrijstelling) applies.

Gift, Estate and Inheritance Taxes

Holders of the ADSs Resident in the Netherlands

Gift tax may be due in the Netherlands with respect to an acquisition of the ADSs by way of a gift by a holder of the ADSs who is resident or deemed to be resident of the Netherlands at the time of the gift.

Inheritance tax may be due in the Netherlands with respect to an acquisition or deemed acquisition of the ADSs by way of an inheritance or bequest on the death of a holder of the ADSs who is resident or deemed to be resident of the Netherlands, or by way of a gift within 180 days before his death by an individual who is resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands at the time of his death.

For purposes of Dutch gift and inheritance tax, an individual with the Dutch nationality will be deemed to be resident in the Netherlands if he has been resident in the Netherlands at any time during the ten years preceding the date of the gift or his death. For purposes of Dutch gift tax, an individual not holding the Dutch nationality will be deemed to be resident of the Netherlands if he has been resident in the Netherlands at any time during the twelve months preceding the date of the gift.

Holders of the ADSs Resident Outside the Netherlands

No gift, estate or inheritance taxes will arise in the Netherlands with respect to an acquisition of our ordinary shares by way of a gift by, or on the death of, a holder of the ADSs who is neither resident nor deemed to be resident of the Netherlands, unless, in the case of a gift of the ADSs by an individual who at the date of the gift was neither resident nor deemed to be resident in the Netherlands, such individual dies within 180 days after the date of the gift, while being resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands.

Certain Special Situations

For purposes of Dutch gift, estate and inheritance tax, (i) a gift by a Third Party will be construed as a gift by the Settlor, and (ii) upon the death of the Settlor, as a rule his/her Beneficiaries will be deemed to have inherited directly from the Settlor. Subsequently, such Beneficiaries will be deemed the settlor, grantor or similar originator of the Separated Private Assets for purposes of Dutch gift, estate and inheritance tax in case of subsequent gifts or inheritances.

For the purposes of Dutch gift and inheritance tax, a gift that is made under a condition precedent is deemed to have been made at the moment such condition precedent is satisfied. If the condition precedent is fulfilled after the death of the donor, the gift is deemed to be made upon the death of the donor.

Value Added Tax

No Dutch value added tax will arise in respect of or in connection with the subscription, issue, placement, allotment or delivery of the ADSs.

183

Table of Contents

Other Taxes and Duties

No Dutch registration tax, capital tax, custom duty, transfer tax, stamp duty or any other similar documentary tax or duty, other than court fees, will be payable in the Netherlands in respect of or in connection with the subscription, issue, placement, allotment or delivery of the ADSs.

Residency

A holder of the ADSs will not be treated as a resident, or a deemed resident, of the Netherlands by reason only of the acquisition, or the holding, of the ADSs or the performance by the company under the ADSs.

Dutch Tax Consequences Upon Completion of Our Possible Redomiciliation

The following summary outlines certain Dutch tax consequences in connection with the acquisition, ownership and disposal of the ADSs, if and when our possible redomiciliation is completed. All references in this summary to the Netherlands and Dutch law are to the European part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and its law, respectively, only. The summary does not purport to present any comprehensive or complete picture of all Dutch tax aspects that could be of relevance to the acquisition, ownership and disposal of the ADSs by a (prospective) holder of the ADSs who may be subject to special tax treatment under applicable law. The summary is based on the tax laws and practice of the Netherlands as in effect on the date of this annual report, which are subject to changes that could prospectively or retrospectively affect the Dutch tax consequences.

For purposes of Dutch income and corporate income tax, shares, or certain other assets which may include depositary receipts in respect of shares, legally owned by a third party such as a trustee, foundation or similar entity or arrangement, or a Third Party, may under certain circumstances have to be allocated to the (deemed) settlor, grantor or similar originator, or the Settlor, or, upon the death of the Settlor, his/her beneficiaries, or the Beneficiaries, in proportion to their entitlement to the estate of the Settlor of such trust or similar arrangement, or the Separated Private Assets.

The summary does not address the tax consequences of a holder of the ADSs who is an individual and who has a substantial interest (aanmerkelijk belang) in the company. Generally, a holder of the ADSs will have a substantial interest in the company if such holder of the ADSs, whether alone or together with his spouse or partner and/or certain other close relatives, holds directly or indirectly, or as Settlor or Beneficiary of Separated Private Assets (i) (x) the ownership of, (y) certain other rights, such as usufruct, over, or (z) rights to acquire (whether or not already issued), shares (including the ADSs) representing 5% or more of the total issued and outstanding capital (or the issued and outstanding capital of any class of shares) of the company or (ii) (x) the ownership of, or (y) certain other rights, such as usufruct over, profit participating certificates (winstbewijzen) that relate to 5% or more of the annual profit of the company or to 5% or more of the liquidation proceeds of the company.

In addition, a holder of our ordinary shares has a substantial interest in the company if he, whether alone or together with his spouse or partner and/or certain other close relatives, has the ownership of, or other rights over, shares, or depositary receipts in respect of shares, in, or profit certificates issued by, the company that represent less than 5% of the relevant aggregate that either (a) qualified as part of a substantial interest as set forth above and where shares, or depositary receipts in respect of shares, profit certificates and/or rights there over have been, or are deemed to have been, partially disposed of, or (b) have been acquired as part of a transaction that qualified for non-recognition of gain treatment.

This summary does not address the tax consequences of a holder of the ADSs who:

| (a) |  | receives income or realizes capital gains in connection with his or her employment activities or in his/her capacity as (former) board member and/or (former) supervisory board member; or

| (b) |  | is a resident of any non-European part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.

184

Table of Contents

PROSPECTIVE HOLDERS OF THE ADSs SHOULD CONSULT THEIR OWN PROFESSIONAL ADVISER WITH RESPECT TO THE TAX CONSEQUENCES OF ANY ACQUISITION, OWNERSHIP OR DISPOSAL OF THE ADSs IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

Dividend Withholding Tax

General

From a Dutch domestic tax perspective, and subject to double tax treaty relief, dividends distributed by the Belgian argenx SE would continue to be subject to Dutch dividend withholding tax as before our possible redomiciliation, on the basis that we are a company incorporated under Dutch law. Pursuant to the Netherlands/Belgium double tax treaty, however, holders of the ADSs will not be subject to Dutch dividend withholding tax on dividends distributed by the company, unless such holder is resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands.

Accordingly, the company could be required to withhold dividend withholding tax imposed by the Netherlands at a rate of 15% on dividends distributed by the company in respect of the ordinary shares underlying the ADSs in the situation described below under “Holders of Our Ordinary Shares Resident in the Netherlands.” The expression “dividends distributed by the company” as used herein includes, but is not limited to:

| (a) |  | distributions in cash or in kind, deemed and constructive distributions and repayments of paid-in capital (“gestort kapitaal”) not recognized for Dutch dividend withholding tax purposes;

| (b) |  | liquidation proceeds, proceeds of redemption of our ordinary shares or, as a rule, consideration for the repurchase of our ordinary shares by the company in excess of the average paid-in capital recognized for Dutch dividend withholding tax purposes;

| (c) |  | the par value of our ordinary shares issued to a holder of our ordinary shares or an increase of the par value of our ordinary shares, to the extent that it does not appear that a contribution, recognized for Dutch dividend withholding tax purposes, has been made or will be made; and

| (d) |  | partial repayment of paid-in capital, recognized for Dutch dividend withholding tax purposes, if and to the extent that there are net profits (zuivere winst), unless (i) the shareholders at the General Meeting have resolved in advance to make such repayment and (ii) the par value of our ordinary shares concerned has been reduced by an equal amount by way of an amendment of the articles of association.

Holders of the ADSs Resident in the Netherlands

Dividends paid by the company to holders of the ADSs that are resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands will be subject to Dutch dividend withholding tax.

A holder of the ADSs that is resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands is generally entitled, subject to the anti-dividend stripping rules described below, to a full credit against its (corporate) income tax liability, or a full refund, of the Dutch dividend withholding tax. The same generally applies to holders of the ADSs that are neither resident nor deemed to be resident in the Netherlands if the ADSs are attributable to a permanent establishment in the Netherlands of such non-resident holder.

Holders of the ADSs Resident Outside the Netherlands

A holder of the ADSs, who is an individual or that is a legal entity, another entity with a capital divided into shares, an association, a foundation or a fund or trust, not resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands for (corporate) income tax purposes, will not be subject to any Dutch dividend withholding tax on distributions made on the ADSs.

185

Table of Contents

Taxes on Income and Capital Gains

Holders of the ADSs Resident in the Netherlands: Individuals

A holder of the ADSs, who is an individual resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands will be subject to regul ar D utch income tax on the income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs by the holder thereof, if:

| (a) |  | such holder of the ADSs has an enterprise or an interest in an enterprise, to which enterprise the ADSs are attributable; and/or

| (b) |  | such income or capital gain forms “a benefit from miscellaneous activities” (“resultaat uit overige werkzaamheden”) which, for instance, would be the case if the activities with respect to the ADSs exceed “normal active asset management” (“normaal, actief vermogensbeheer”) or if income and gains are derived from the holding, whether directly or indirectly, of (a combination of) shares, debt claims or other rights (together, a “lucrative interest” (lucratief belang)) that the holder thereof has acquired under such circumstances that such income and gains are intended to be remuneration for work or services performed by such holder (or a related person), whether within or outside an employment relation, where such lucrative interest provides the holder thereof, economically speaking, with certain benefits that have a relation to the relevant work or services.

If either of the abovementioned conditions (a) or (b) applies, income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs will in general be subject to Dutch income tax at the progressive rates up to 51.95%.

If the abovementioned conditions (a) and (b) do not apply, a holder of the ADSs who is an individual, resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands will not be subject to taxes on income and capital gains in the Netherlands. Instead, such individual is generally taxed at a flat rate of 30% on deemed income from “savings and investments” (“sparen en beleggen”), which deemed income is determined on the basis of the amount included in the individual’s “yield basis” (“rendementsgrondslag”) at the beginning of the calendar year (minus a tax-free threshold). For the 2018 tax year, the deemed income derived from savings and investments will amount to 2.02% of the individual’s yield basis up to €70,800, 4.33% of the individual’s yield basis exceeding €70,800 up to and including €978,000 and 5.38% of the individual’s yield basis in excess of €978,000. The tax-free threshold for 2018 is €30,000.

Holders of the ADSs Resident in the Netherlands: Corporate Entities

A holder of the ADSs that is resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands for corporate income tax purposes, and that is:

| · |  | a corporat ion;

| · |  | another entity with a capital divided into shares;

| · |  | a cooperative (association); or

| · |  | another le gal entity that has an enterprise or an interest in an enterprise to which the ADSs are attributable,

b ut which is not:

| · |  | a qualifying pension fund;

186

Table of Contents

| · |  | a qualifying investment fund (fiscale beleggingsinstelling) or a qualifying exempt investment institution (vrijgestelde beleggingsinstelling); or

| · |  | another en tity exempt from corporate income tax,

will in general be subject to regular corporate income tax, generally levied at a rate of 25% (20% over profits up to €200,000) over income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs, unless, and to the extent that, the participation exemption (deelnemingsvrijstelling) applies.

Holders of the ADSs Resident Outside the Netherlands: Individuals

A holder of the ADSs who is an individual, not resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands will not be subject to any Dutch taxes on income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs (other than the dividend withholding tax described above), unless:

| (a) |  | such h older has an enterprise or an interest in an enterprise that is, in whole or in part, carried on through a permanent establishment (vaste inrichting) or a permanent representative (vaste vertegenwoordiger) in the Netherlands and to which enterprise or part of an enterprise, as the case may be, the ADSs are attributable; or

| (b) |  | such income or capital gain forms a “benefit from miscellaneous activities in the Netherlands” (“resultaat uit overige werkzaamheden in Nederland”) which would for instance be the case if the activities in the Netherlands with respect to the ADSs exceed “normal active asset management” (“normaal, actief vermogensbeheer” or if such income and gains are derived from the holding, whether directly or indirectly, of (a combination of) shares, debt claims or other rights (together, a “lucrative interest” (“lucratief belang”)) that the holder thereof has acquired under such circumstances that such income and gains are intended to be remuneration for work or services performed by such holder (or a related person), in whole or in part, in the Netherlands, whether within or outside an employment relation, where such lucrative interest provides the holder thereof, economically speaking, with certain benefits that have a relation to the relevant work or services.

If either of the abovementioned conditions (a) or (b) applies, income or capital gains in respect of dividends distributed by the company or in respect of any gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs will in general be subject to Dutch income tax at the progressive rates up to 51.95%.

Holders of the ADSs Resident Outside the Netherlands: Legal and Other Entities

A holder of the ADSs, that is a legal entity, another entity with a capital divided into shares, an association, a foundation or a fund or trust, not resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands for corporate income tax purposes, will not be subject to any Dutch taxes on income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs (other than the dividend withholding tax described above), unless:

| (a) |  | such holder has an enterprise or an interest in an enterprise that is, in whole or in part, carried on through a permanent establishmen t (vaste inrichting) or a permanent representative (vaste vertegenwoordiger) in the Netherlands and to which enterprise or part of an enterprise, as the case may be, the ADSs are attributable; or

| (b) |  | such holder ha s a substantial interest (aanmerkelijk belang) in the company, that (i) is held with the avoidance of Dutch income tax of another person as (one of) the main purpose(s) and (ii) forms part of an artificial structure or series of structures (such as structures which are not put into place for valid business reasons reflecting economic reality).

187

Table of Contents

If one of the abovementioned conditions applies, income derived from the ADSs and the gains realized upon the acquisition, redemption and/or disposal of the ADSs will, in general, be subject to Dutch regular corporate income tax, levied at a rate of 25% (20% over profits up to €200,000), unless, and to the extent that, with respect to a holder as described under (a), the participation exemption (deelnemingsvrijstelling) applies.

Gift, Estate and Inheritance Taxes

Holders of the ADSs Resident in the Netherlands

Gift tax may be due in the Netherlands with respect to an acquisition of the ADSs by way of a gift by a holder of the ADSs who is resident or deemed to be resident of the Netherlands at the time of the gift.

Inheritance tax may be due in the Netherlands with respect to an acquisition or deemed acquisition of the ADSs by way of an inheritance or bequest on the death of a holder of the ADSs who is resident or deemed to be resident of the Netherlands, or by way of a gift within 180 days before his death by an individual who is resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands at the time of his death.

For purposes of Dutch gift and inheritance tax, an individual with the Dutch nationality will be deemed to be resident in the Netherlands if he has been resident in the Netherlands at any time during the ten years preceding the date of the gift or his death. For purposes of Dutch gift tax, an individual not holding the Dutch nationality will be deemed to be resident of the Netherlands if he has been resident in the Netherlands at any time during the twelve months preceding the date of the gift.

Holders of the ADSs Resident Outside the Netherlands

No gift, estate or inheritance taxes will arise in the Netherlands with respect to an acquisition of the ADSs by way of a gift by, or on the death of, a holder of the ADSs who is neither resident nor deemed to be resident of the Netherlands, unless, in the case of a gift of the ADSs by an individual who at the date of the gift was neither resident nor deemed to be resident in the Netherlands, such individual dies within 180 days after the date of the gift, while being resident or deemed to be resident in the Netherlands.

Certain Special Situations

For purposes of Dutch gift, estate and inheritance tax, (i) a gift by a Third Party will be construed as a gift by the Settlor, and (ii) upon the death of the Settlor, as a rule his/her Beneficiaries will be deemed to have inherited directly from the Settlor. Subsequently, such Beneficiaries will be deemed the settlor, grantor or similar originator of the Separated Private Assets for purposes of Dutch gift, estate and inheritance tax in case of subsequent gifts or inheritances.

For the purposes of Dutch gift and inheritance tax, a gift that is made under a condition precedent is deemed to have been made at the moment such condition precedent is satisfied. If the condition precedent is fulfilled after the death of the donor, the gift is deemed to be made upon the death of the donor.

Value Added Tax

No Dutch value added tax will arise in respect of or in connection with the subscription, issue, placement, allotment or delivery of the ADSs.

Other Taxes and Duties

No Dutch registration tax, capital tax, custom duty, transfer tax, stamp duty or any other similar documentary tax or duty, other than court fees, will be payable in the Netherlands in respect of or in connection with the subscription, issue, placement, allotment or delivery of the ADSs.

188

Table of Contents

Residency

A holder of our ordinary shares will not be treated as a resident, or a deemed resident, of the Netherlands by reason only of the acquisition, or the holding, of the ADSs or the performance by the company under the ADSs.

Belgian Tax Consequences

The paragraphs below present a summary of certain Belgian federal income tax consequences of the ownership and disposal of ADSs by an investor that purchases such ADSs. The summary is based on laws, treaties and regulatory interpretations in effect in Belgium on the date of this annual report, all of which are subject to change, including changes that could have retroactive effect.

Investors should appreciate that, as a result of evolutions in law or practice, the eventual tax consequences may be different from what is stated below.

This summary does not purport to address all tax consequences of the ownership and disposal of ADSs, and does not take into account the specific circumstances of particular investors, some of which may be subject to special rules, or the tax laws of any country other than Belgium. This summary does not describe the tax treatment of investors that are subject to special rules, such as banks, insurance companies, collective investment undertakings, dealers in securities or currencies, persons that hold, or will hold, ADSs as a position in a straddle, share-repurchase transaction, conversion transactions, synthetic security or other integrated financial transactions. This summary does not address the local taxes that may be due in connection with an investment in shares, other than the local surcharges which generally vary between 0% and 9% of the investor’s income tax liability in Belgium.

In addition to the assumptions mentioned above, it is also assumed in this discussion that for purposes of the domestic Belgian tax legislation, the owners of ADSs will be treated as the owners of the ordinary shares represented by such ADSs. However, this assumption has not been confirmed by or verified with the Belgian Tax Authorities.

Investors should consult their own advisors regarding the tax consequences of an investment in the ADSs in light of their particular situation, including the effect of any state, local or other national laws, treaties and regulatory interpretations thereof.

For the purposes of this summary, a resident investor is:

| · |  | an individual subject to Belgian personal income tax, i.e. (i) an individual having its domicile in Belgium, (ii) when not having its domicile in Belgium, an individual having its seat of wealth in Belgium, or (iii) an individual assimilated to a resident for purposes of Belgian tax law;

| · |  | a company (as defined by Belgian tax law) subject to Belgian corporate income tax, i.e. a corporate entity having its principal establishment, administrative seat or effective place of management in Belgium (and that is not excluded from the scope of the Belgian corporate income tax). A company having its registered seat in Belgium shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, to have its principal establishment, administrative seat or effective place of management in Belgium; or

| · |  | a legal entity subject to the Belgian tax on legal entities, i.e. a legal entity other than a company subject to Belgian corporate income tax having its principal establishment, administrative seat or effective place of management in Belgium.

A non-resident investor is any individual, company or legal entity that does not fall in any of the three previous classes.

189

Table of Contents

Dividends

For Belgian income tax purposes, the gross amount of all benefits paid on or attributed to the ADSs is generally treated as a dividend distribution. By way of exception, the repayment of capital carried out in accordance with applicable Dutch company law provisions not treated as a dividend distribution to the extent that such repayment is imputed to fiscal capital. This fiscal capital includes, in principle, the actual paid-up statutory share capital and, subject to certain conditions, the paid-up share premiums and the cash amounts subscribed to at the time of the issue of profit sharing certificates. However, it is not possible to fully impute a repayment of capital to fiscal capital if the company also has certain reserves. Indeed, in such case, a reimbursement of capital is proratedly imputed on, on the one hand, fiscal capital and, on the other hand, taxed reserves (whether or not incorporated in capital) and tax‑exempt reserves incorporated in capital (according to a specific priority rule). The part imputed on the reserves is treated as a dividend distribution subject to applicable tax rules.

Belgian withholding tax of 30% is normally levied on dividends by any intermediary established in Belgium that is in any way involved in the processing of the payment of non-Belgian sourced dividends (e.g. a Belgian financial institution). This withholding tax rate is subject to such relief as may be available under applicable domestic or tax treaty provisions.

The Belgian withholding tax is calculated on the dividend amount after deduction of any non-Belgian dividend withholding tax.

In the case of a redemption of the ADSs, the redemption distribution (after deduction of the part of the fiscal capital represented by the redeemed ADSs) will be treated as a dividend subject to a Belgian withholding tax of 30%, subject to such relief as may be available under applicable domestic or tax treaty provisions. No withholding tax will be triggered if this redemption is carried out on a stock exchange and meets certain conditions.

In the event of our liquidation, any amounts distributed in excess of the fiscal capital will in principle be subject to the 30% withholding tax, subject to such relief as may be available under applicable domestic or tax treaty provisions.

Under Belgian law, non-Belgian dividend withholding tax is not creditable against Belgian income tax and is not reimbursable to the extent that it exceeds Belgian income tax. Please refer to “Item 10.E.—Taxation—Dutch Tax consequences—Dividend Withholding Tax” for a description of withholding tax that may be imposed on dividends by the Netherlands.

Belgian Resident Individuals

For Belgian resident individuals who acquire and hold ADSs as a private investment, the Belgian dividend withholding tax fully discharges their personal income tax liability. They may nevertheless need to report the dividends in their personal income tax return if no intermediary established in Belgium was in any way involved in the processing of the payment of the non-Belgian sourced dividends. Moreover, even if an intermediary established in Belgium was involved, they can opt to report the income in their personal income tax return. If (and only if) the dividends are reported, they will normally be eligible for a tax exemption with respect to ordinary dividends in an amount of up to €800 per year and per taxpayer (Article 21, first subsection, 14°, of the Belgian Income Tax Code ("ITC")). For the avoidance of doubt, all reported dividends (not only dividends distributed on our ADSs) are taken into account to assess whether the said maximum amount is reached.

Where the beneficiary needs or, as applicable, opts to report them, dividends will normally be taxable at the lower of the generally applicable 30% Belgian withholding tax rate on dividends or, in case globalization is more advantageous, at the progressive personal income tax rates applicable to the taxpayer’s overall declared income. In addition, if the dividends are reported, the Belgian dividend withholding tax levied at source may be credited against the personal income tax due and is reimbursable to the extent that it exceeds the personal income tax due, provided that the dividend distribution does not result in a reduction in value of or a capital loss on our

190

Table of Contents

ADSs. The latter condition is not applicable if the individual can demonstrate that it has held ADSs in full legal ownership for an uninterrupted period of 12 months prior to the payment or attribution of the dividends.

For Belgian resident individual investors who acquire and hold the ADSs for professional purposes, the Belgian withholding tax does not fully discharge their Belgian income tax liability. Dividends received must be reported by the investor and will, in such a case, be taxable at the investor’s personal income tax rate increased with local surcharges. Belgian withholding tax levied may be credited against the personal income tax due and is reimbursable to the extent that it exceeds the income tax due, subject to two conditions: (i) the taxpayer must own the ADSs in full legal ownership on the dividend record date and (ii) the dividend distribution may not result in a reduction in value of or a capital loss on the ADSs. The latter condition is not applicable if the investor can demonstrate that it has held the full legal ownership of the ADSs for an uninterrupted period of 12 months prior to the payment or attribution of the dividends.

Belgian Resident Companies

Dividends received by Belgian resident companies are exempt from Belgian withholding tax provided that the investor satisfies the identification requirements in Article 117, par. 11 of the Royal Decree implementing the ITC.

For Belgian resident companies, the gross dividend income (after deduction of any non-Belgian withholding tax but including any Belgian withholding tax) must be declared in the corporate income tax return and will be subject to a corporate income tax rate of 29.58% (including a 2% crisis surcharge), except that a reduced corporate income tax rate of 20.4% (including a 2% crisis surcharge) applies to small companies and medium sized enterprises (as defined by Article 1:24, §1 to §6 of the Belgian Code on Companies and Associations) on the first €100,000 of taxable profits (subject to certain conditions). As of assessment year 2021 linked to a tax year starting on or after January 1, 2020, the standard corporate income tax rate is 25%, and the reduced rate is 20%.

Belgian resident companies can generally (although subject to certain limitations) deduct 100% of the gross dividend received from their taxable income, or the Dividend Received Deduction, provided that at the time of a dividend payment or attribution: (i) the Belgian resident company holds ADSs representing at least 10% of our share capital or a participation with an acquisition value of at least €2,500,000 (it being understood that only one out of the two tests must be satisfied); (ii) the shares representing our share capital have been or will be held in full ownership for an uninterrupted period of at least one year; and (iii) the conditions described in Article 203 of the ITC (relating to the taxation of the underlying distributed income and the absence of abuse), or the Article 203 of the ITC Taxation Condition, are met, or together, the Conditions for the application of the dividend deceived deduction regime.

Conditions (i) and (ii) above are, in principle, not applicable for dividends received by an investment company within the meaning of art. 2, §1, 5°, f) ITC. The Conditions for the application of the dividend received deduction regime depend on a factual analysis and for this reason the availability of this regime should be verified upon each dividend distribution.

Any Belgian dividend withholding tax levied at source can be credited against the ordinary Belgian corporate income tax and is reimbursable to the extent it exceeds such corporate income tax, subject to two conditions: (i) the taxpayer must own the ADSs in full legal ownership on the dividend record date and (ii) the dividend distribution does not result in a reduction in value of or a capital loss on the ADSs. The latter condition is not applicable: (i) if the taxpayer can demonstrate that it has held the ADSs in full legal ownership for an uninterrupted period of 12 months immediately prior to the payment or attribution of the dividends or (ii) if, during that period, the ADSs never belonged to a taxpayer other than a Belgian resident company or a non-resident company that has, in an uninterrupted manner, invested the ADSs in a permanent establishment, or PE, in Belgium.

191

Table of Contents

Organizations for Financing Pensions

For organizations for financing pensions, or OFPs, i.e., Belgian pension funds incorporated under the form of an OFP (organisme de financement de pensions/organisme voor de financiering van pensioenen) within the meaning of Article 8 of the Belgian Law of October 27, 2006, dividend income generally does not constitute taxable income.

Dividends distributed through the intervention of a Belgian intermediary are generally subject to Belgian dividend withholding tax. If dividends are paid or attributed without the intervention of a Belgian intermediary, the applicable Belgian withholding tax will have to be reported and paid by the OFP to the Belgian tax administration.

The Belgian dividend withholding tax can in principle be credited against the OFPs’ corporate income tax and is reimbursable to the extent it exceeds the corporate income tax due. However, such Belgian withholding cannot be credited by an OFP if the shares on which the dividends are paid have not been held uninterruptedly in full ownership for at least 60 days, unless the OFP demonstrates that the dividends are not connected to an arrangement (or a series of arrangements) that is not genuine (“kunstmatig”/“pas authentique”) and has been put in place for the main purpose or one of the main purposes of obtaining this withholding tax credit.

Other Taxable Legal Entities

For taxpayers subject to the Belgian income tax on legal entities, the Belgian dividend withholding tax in principle fully discharges their income tax liability. If the dividend is paid outside Belgium without the intervention of a Belgian paying agent and without the deduction of Belgian withholding tax, the legal entity is in principle required to declare and pay the 30% withholding tax to the Belgian tax authorities.

Belgian Non-Resident Individuals and Companies

Dividend payments on the ADSs through a professional intermediary in Belgium will, in principle, be subject to the 30% withholding tax, unless the shareholder is resident in a country with which Belgium has concluded a double taxation agreement and delivers the requested affidavit. Non-resident investors can also obtain an exemption of Belgian dividend withholding tax if they are the owners or usufructors of the ADSs and they deliver an affidavit confirming that they have not allocated the ADSs to business activities in Belgium and that they are non-residents, provided that the dividend is paid through a Belgian credit institution, stock market company or recognized clearing or settlement institution.

If the ADSs are acquired by a non-resident investor in connection with a business in Belgium, the investor must report any dividends received, which are taxable at the applicable non-resident individual or corporate income tax rate, as appropriate. Any Belgian withholding tax levied at source can be credited against the non-resident individual or corporate income tax and is reimbursable to the extent it exceeds the income tax due, subject to two conditions: (i) the taxpayer must own the ADSs in full legal ownership on the dividend record date and (ii) the dividend distribution does not result in a reduction in value of or a capital loss on the ADSs. The latter condition is not applicable if (i) the non-resident individual or the non-resident company can demonstrate that the ADSs were held in full legal ownership for an uninterrupted period of 12 months immediately prior to the payment or attribution of the dividends or (ii) with regard to non-resident companies only, if, during the said period, the ADSs have not belonged to a taxpayer other than a resident company or a non-resident company which has, in an uninterrupted manner, invested the ADSs in a Belgian PE.

Non-resident companies that have invested the ADSs in a Belgian establishment can deduct 100% of the gross dividends included in their taxable profits if, at the date dividends are paid or attributed, the Conditions for the application of the Dividend Received Deduction regime are satisfied. Application of the Dividend Received Deduction regime depends, however, on a factual analysis to be made upon each distribution and its availability should be verified upon each distribution.

192

Table of Contents

Capital Gains and Losses on ADSs

Belgian Resident Individuals

In principle, Belgian resident individuals acquiring the ADSs as a private investment should not be subject to Belgian capital gains tax on the disposal of the ADSs; capital losses are not tax deductible.

Capital gains realized in a private (i.e., non-professional) context on the transfer for consideration of shares by a private individual, are taxable at 33% (plus local surcharges) if the capital gain is deemed to be realized outside the scope of the normal management of the individual’s private estate. Capital losses are, however, not tax deductible in such event.

Gains realized by Belgian resident individuals upon the redemption of the ADSs or upon our liquidation are generally taxable as a dividend.

Belgian resident individuals who hold the ADSs for professional purposes are taxable at the ordinary progressive personal income tax rates (plus local surcharges) on any capital gains realized upon the disposal of the ADSs, except for ADSs held for more than five years, which are taxable at a flat rate of 16.5% (plus local surcharges). Capital losses on the ADSs incurred by Belgian resident individuals who hold the ADSs for professional purposes are in principle tax deductible.

Belgian Resident Companies

Belgian resident companies are normally not subject to Belgian capital gains taxation on gains realized upon the disposal of our ADSs provided that (i) the shares represent at least 10% of our share capital or a participation with an acquisition value of at least € 2,500,000 (it being understood that only one out of the two tests must be satisfied), (ii) the Article 203 ITC Taxation Condition is satisfied and (iii) the ADSs have been held in full legal ownership for an uninterrupted period of at least one year immediately preceding the disposal.

If the one-year minimum holding condition would not be satisfied (but the other conditions are) the capital gains realized upon the disposal of our ADSs by a Belgian resident company are taxable at a flat corporate income tax rate of, currently, 25.5% (including the 2% crisis surcharge). As of assessment year 2021 linked to a tax year starting on or after January 1, 2020, the tax rate in this case will be equal to the 25% standard tax rate.

If the Article 203 ITC Taxation Condition is not satisfied or the participation condition is not met, the capital gains are taxable at the standard corporate tax rate (of 29.58% currently and of 25% as of assessment year 2021 linked to a tax year starting on or after January 1, 2020), unless the reduced corporate income tax rate on the first €100,000 of taxable profits (see above) applies.

Capital losses on our ADSs incurred by resident companies are as a general rule not tax deductible.

Our ADSs held in the trading portfolios (portefeuille commercial/handelsportefeuille) of qualifying credit institutions, investment enterprises and management companies of collective investment undertakings which are subject to the Royal Decree of 23 September 1992 on the annual accounts of credit institutions, investment firms and management companies of collective investment undertakings (comptes annuels des etablissements de credit, des entreprises d’investissement et des societes de gestion d’organismes de placement collectif/jaarrekening van de kredietinstellingen, de beleggingsondernemingen en de beheervennootschappen van instellingen voor collectieve belegging) are subject to a different regime. The capital gains on such shares are taxable at the ordinary corporate income tax rate of 29.58% (including the 2% crisis surcharge), which is reduced to 25% as of assessment year 2021 linked to a tax year starting on or after January 1, 2020. Capital losses on such shares are tax deductible. Internal transfers to and from the trading portfolio are assimilated to a realization.

Capital gains realized by Belgian resident companies (both non-SMEs and SMEs and both ordinary Belgian resident companies and qualifying credit institutions, investment enterprises and management companies

193

Table of Contents

of collective investment undertakings) upon the redemption of our ADSs or upon our liquidation are, in principle, subject to the same taxation regime as dividends. See “Item 10.E.—Taxation—Dividends.”

Organizations for Financing Pensions

OFPs are, in principle, not subject to Belgian capital gains taxation realized upon the disposal of the ADSs, and capital losses are not tax deductible.

Other Taxable Legal Entities

Belgian resident legal entities subject to the legal entities income tax are, in principle, not subject to Belgian capital gains taxation on the disposal of ADSs.

Capital gains realized by Belgian resident legal entities upon the redemption of ADSs or upon our liquidation will in principle be taxed as dividends.

Capital losses on ADSs incurred by Belgian resident legal entities are not tax deductible.

Belgian Non-Resident Individuals and Companies

Non-resident individuals or companies are, in principle, not subject to Belgian income tax on capital gains realized upon disposal of the ADSs, unless such ADSs are held as part of a business conducted in Belgium through a Belgian establishment. In such a case, the same principles apply as described with regard to Belgian individuals (holding the shares for professional purposes) or Belgian companies.

Non-resident individuals who do not use the shares for professional purposes and who have their fiscal residence in a country with which Belgium has not concluded a tax treaty or with which Belgium has concluded a tax treaty that confers the authority to tax capital gains on the ADSs to Belgium, might be subject to tax in Belgium if the capital gains arise from transactions which are to be considered speculative or beyond the normal management of one’s private estate. See “Item 10.E.—Taxation—Capital gains and losses on ADSs—Belgian resident individuals.” Such non-resident individuals might therefore be obliged to file a tax return and should consult their own tax advisor.

Capital gains realized by non-resident individuals or non-resident companies upon the redemption of ADSs or upon our liquidation will, in principle, be subject to the same taxation regime as dividends.

.

Tax on Stock Exchange Transactions

Upon the issue of the ADSs (primary market), no Tax on Stock Exchange Transactions (“taks op de beursverrichtingen” / “taxe sur les opérations de bourse”) is due.

The purchase and the sale and any other acquisition or transfer for consideration of ADSs (secondary market transactions) is subject to the Tax on Stock Exchange Transactions if (i) it is executed in Belgium through a professional intermediary, or (ii) deemed to be executed in Belgium, which is the case if the order is directly or indirectly made to a professional intermediary established outside of Belgium, either by private individuals with habitual residence in Belgium, or legal entities for the account of their seat or establishment in Belgium (both, a Belgian Investor).

The Tax on Stock Exchange Transactions is levied at a rate of 0.35% of the purchase price, capped at €1,600 per transaction and per party.

A separate tax is due by each party to the transaction, and both taxes are collected by the professional intermediary. However, if the intermediary is established outside of Belgium, the tax will in principle be due by the

194

Table of Contents

Belgian Investor, unless that Belgian Investor can demonstrate that the tax has already been paid. Professional intermediaries established outside of Belgium can, subject to certain conditions and formalities, appoint a Belgian Stock Exchange Tax Representative, which will be liable for the Tax on Stock Exchange Transactions in respect of the transactions executed through the professional intermediary. If the Stock Exchange Tax Representative would have paid the Tax on Stock Exchange Transactions due, the Belgian Investor will, as per the above, no longer be the debtor of the Tax on Stock Exchange Transactions.

No tax on stock exchange transactions is due on transactions entered into by the following parties, provided they are acting for their own account: (i) professional intermediaries described in Article 2,9° and 10° of the Belgian Law of August 2, 2002; (ii) insurance companies described in Article 2, §1 of the Belgian Law of July 9, 1975; (iii) professional retirement institutions referred to in Article 2,1° of the Belgian Law of October 27, 2006 concerning the supervision on institutions for occupational pension; (iv) collective investment institutions; (v) regulated real estate companies; and (vi) Belgian non-residents provided they deliver a certificate to their financial intermediary in Belgium confirming their non-resident status.

The EU Commission adopted on February 14, 2013 the Draft Directive on a Financial Transaction Tax, or FTT. The Draft Directive currently stipulates that once the FTT enters into force, the Participating Member States shall not maintain or introduce taxes on financial transactions other than the FTT (or VAT as provided in the Council Directive 2006/112/EC of November 28, 2006 on the common system of value added tax). For Belgium, the tax on stock exchange transactions should thus be abolished once the FTT enters into force. The Draft Directive regarding the FTT is still subject to negotiation between the Participating Member States and therefore may be changed at any time.

Enforcement of Civil Liabilities

We are a European public company with limited liability (Societas Europaea or SE) incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands. Upon completion of our redomiciliation, we will be a European public company with limited liability (Societas Europaea or SE) incorporated under the laws of Belgium. Substantially all of our assets are located outside the United States. The majority of our directors reside outside the United States. As a result, it may not be possible for investors to effect service of process within the United States upon such persons or to enforce against them or us in U.S. courts, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the federal securities laws of the United States.

The United States and the Netherlands currently do not have a treaty providing for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments, other than arbitration awards, in civil and commercial matters. Consequently, a final judgment for payment given by a court in the United States, whether or not predicated solely upon U.S. securities laws, would not automatically be recognized or enforceable in the Netherlands. In order to obtain a judgment which is enforceable in the Netherlands, the party in whose favor a final and conclusive judgment of the U.S. court has been rendered will be required to file its claim with a court of competent jurisdiction in the Netherlands. Such party may submit to the Dutch court the final judgment rendered by the U.S. court. This court will have discretion to attach such weight to the judgment rendered by the relevant U.S. court as it deems appropriate. The Dutch courts can be expected to give conclusive effect to a final and enforceable judgment of such court in respect of the contractual obligations thereunder without re-examination or re-litigation of the substantive matters adjudicated upon, provided that: (i) the U.S. court involved accepted jurisdiction on the basis of internationally recognized grounds to accept jurisdiction, (ii) the proceedings before such court being in compliance with principles of proper procedure (behoorlijke rechtspleging), (iii) such judgment not being contrary to the public policy of the Netherlands and (iv) such judgment not being incompatible with a judgment given between the same parties by a Netherlands court or with a prior judgment given between the same parties by a foreign court in a dispute concerning the same subject matter and based on the same cause of action, provided such prior judgment fulfills the conditions necessary for it to be given binding effect in the Netherlands. Dutch courts may deny the recognition and enforcement of punitive damages or other awards. Moreover, a Dutch court may reduce the amount of damages granted by a U.S. court and recognize damages only to the extent that they are necessary to compensate actual losses or damages. Enforcement and recognition of judgments of U.S. courts in the Netherlands are solely governed by the provisions of the Dutch Civil Procedure Code.

195

Table of Contents

Original actions or actions for the enforcement of judgments of U.S. courts relating to the civil liability provisions of the federal or state securities laws of the United States are not directly enforceable in Belgium. The United States and Belgium currently do not have a treaty providing for reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments, other than arbitral awards, in civil and commercial matters. Consequently, a final judgment for payment given by a court in the United States, whether or not predicated solely upon U.S. securities laws, would not automatically be recognized or enforceable in Belgium. In order for a final judgment for the payment of money rendered by U.S. courts based on civil liability to produce any effect on Belgian soil, it is accordingly required that this judgment be recognized and be declared enforceable by a Belgian court pursuant to the relevant provisions of the PIL Code. Recognition or enforcement does not imply a review of the merits of the case and is irrespective of any reciprocity requirement. A U.S. judgment will, however, not be recognized or declared enforceable in Belgium if it infringes upon one or more of the grounds for refusal which are exhaustively listed in article 25 of the PIL Code. In addition to recognition or enforcement, a judgment by a federal or state court in the United States against us may also serve as evidence in a similar action in a Belgian court if it meets the conditions required for the authenticity of judgments according to the law of the state where it was rendered. In addition, with regard to enforcements by legal proceedings in Belgium (including the recognition of foreign court decisions in Belgium), a registration tax at the rate of 3% of the amount of the judgment is payable by the debtor, if the sum of money which the debtor is ordered to pay by a Belgian court, or by a foreign court judgment that is either (i) automatically enforceable and registered in Belgium, or (ii) rendered enforceable by a Belgian court, exceeds €12,500. The registration tax is payable by the debtor. The debtor is liable for the payment of the registration tax, in the proportion determined by the decision ordering payment or liquidation or determining priority for creditors made or established against it. The debtor(s) are jointly and severally liable in the event that they are ordered to pay jointly and severally. A stamp duty is payable for each original copy of an enforcement judgment rendered by a Belgian court, with a maximum of €1,450.

Dutch and Belgian civil procedure differs substantially from U.S. civil procedure in a number of respects. Insofar as the production of evidence is concerned, U.S. law and the laws of several other jurisdictions based on common law provide for pre-trial discovery, a process by which parties to the proceedings may prior to trial compel the production of documents by adverse or third parties and the deposition of witnesses. Evidence obtained in this manner may be decisive in the outcome of any proceeding. No such pre-trial discovery process exists under Dutch or Belgian law.

Subject to the foregoing and service of process in accordance with applicable treaties, investors may be able to enforce in the Netherlands or Belgium judgments in civil and commercial matters obtained from U.S. federal or state courts. However, no assurance can be given that those judgments will be enforceable. In addition, it is doubtful whether a Dutch or Belgian court would accept jurisdiction and impose civil liability in an original action commenced in the Netherlands or Belgium and predicated solely upon U.S. federal securities laws.

F. DIVIDENDS AND PAYING AGENTS

Not applicable.

G. STATEMENT BY EXPERTS

Not applicable.

H. DOCUMENTS ON DISPLAY

We are subject to the information reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to foreign private issuers and under those requirements will file reports with the SEC. Those reports may be inspected without charge at the locations described below. As a foreign private issuer, we are exempt from the rules under the Exchange Act related to the furnishing and content of proxy statements, and our officers, directors and principal shareholders are exempt from the reporting and short-swing profit recovery provisions contained in Section 16 of the Exchange Act. In addition, we are not required under the Exchange Act to file periodic reports and financial statements with the SEC as frequently or as promptly as United States companies whose securities are registered

196

Table of Contents

under the Exchange Act. Nevertheless, we will file with the SEC an annual report containing financial statements that have been examined and reported on, with and opinion expressed by an independent registered public accounting firm.

We maintain a corporate website at www.argenx.com. We intend to post a link to our annual report on Form 20-F as filed with the SEC on our website promptly following it being filed with the SEC. Information contained on, or that can be accessed through, our website does not constitute a part of this annual report. We have included our website address in this annual report solely as an inactive textual reference.

You may also review a copy of this annual report, including exhibits and any schedule filed herewith, and obtain copies of such materials at prescribed rates, at the SEC’s Public Reference Room in Room 1580, 100 F Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 20549-0102. You may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains a website (www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding registrants, such as argenx SE, that file electronically with the SEC.

With respect to references made in this annual report to any contract or other document of argenx SE, such references are not necessarily complete and you should refer to the exhibits attached or incorporated by reference to this annual report for copies of the actual contract or document.

I. SUBSIDIARY INFORMATION

Not applicable.

ITEM 11. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

We are exposed to a variety of financial risks, including interest rate risk and foreign exchange risk. We do not buy or trade financial instruments for speculative purposes.

Interest Rate Risk

We are currently not exposed to significant interest rate risk. Our only interest-bearing financial assets are cash at banks on deposit and term accounts. Given the short-term nature of these investments, the sensitivity towards interest rate fluctuations is deemed not to be significant. Therefore, the effect of an increase or decrease in interest rates would only have an immaterial effect on our financial results.

Foreign Exchange Risk

We undertake transactions denominated in foreign currencies; consequently, exposures to exchange rate fluctuations arise. Our functional currency is the euro and the majority of our operating expenses are paid in euros, but we also receive payments from our main business partners, Janssen and AbbVie, in U.S. dollars and we regularly acquire services, consumables and materials in U.S. dollars, Swiss Francs, British Pounds and Japanese Yens.

In order to finance the growth of our activities in the United States, we invested a significant portion of the proceeds from our initial U.S. public offering completed in May 2017 in U.S. dollar denominated cash deposit accounts and in current financial assets. Depending on the exchange rate fluctuations of the U.S. dollar, this may result in unrealized exchange rate losses which may impact negatively the reporting of our cash and cash equivalents and current financial assets at reporting dates when translating to euros these U.S. denominated cash deposits accounts and current financial assets.

197

Table of Contents

For more information about our exposure to market risk and how we manage this risk, please see “Note 27—Financial instruments and financial risk management” in our consolidated financial statements appended to this annual report.

ITEM 12. DESCRIPTION OF SECURITIES OTHER THAN EQUITY SECURITIES

A. DEBT SECURITIES

Not applicable.

B. WARRANTS AND RIGHTS

Not applicable.

C. OTHER SECURITIES

Not applicable.

D. AMERICAN DEPOSITARY SHARES

The Bank of New York Mellon, as depositary, will register and deliver American Depositary Shares, also referred to as ADSs. Each ADS will represent one share (or a right to receive one share) deposited with ING Bank N.V., as custodian for the depositary in The Netherlands. Each ADS will also represent any other securities, cash or other property which may be held by the depositary. The deposited shares together with our other securities, cash and other property held by the depositary, are referred to as the deposited securities. The depositary’s office at which the ADSs are administered is located at 101 Barclay Street, New York, New York 10286. The Bank of New York Mellon’s principal executive office is located at 225 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10286.

A deposit agreement among us, the depositary, ADS holders and all other persons indirectly or beneficially holding ADSs sets out ADS holder rights as well as the rights and obligations of the depositary. New York law governs the deposit agreement and the ADSs. A copy of the deposit agreement is incorporated by reference as an exhibit to this annual report.

198

Table of Contents

Fees and Charges

Persons depositing or withdrawing shares or ADS holders must pay: |  | For:
$5.00 (or less) per 100 ADSs (or portion of 100 ADSs) |  | Issuance of ADSs, including issuances resulting from a distribution of shares or rights or other property
|  | Cancellation of ADSs for the purpose of withdrawal, including if the deposit agreement terminates
$.05 (or less) per ADS |  | Any cash distribution to ADS holders
A fee equivalent to the fee that would be payable if securities distributed to you had been shares and the shares had been deposited for issuance of ADSs |  | Distribution of securities distributed to holders of deposited securities (including rights) that are distributed by the depositary to ADS holders
$.05 (or less) per ADS per calendar year |  | Depositary services
Registration or transfer fees |  | Transfer and registration of shares on our share register to or from the name of the depositary or its agent when you deposit or withdraw shares
Expenses of the depositary |  | Cable, telex and facsimile transmissions (when expressly provided in the deposit agreement)
|  | Converting foreign currency to U.S. dollars
Taxes and other governmental charges the depositary or the custodian has to pay on any ADSs or shares underlying ADSs, such as stock transfer taxes, stamp duty or withholding taxes |  | As necessary
Any charges incurred by the depositary or its agents for servicing the deposited securities |  | As necessary

The depositary collects its fees for delivery and surrender of ADSs directly from investors depositing shares or surrendering ADSs for the purpose of withdrawal or from intermediaries acting for them. The depositary collects fees for making distributions to investors by deducting those fees from the amounts distributed or by selling a portion of distributable property to pay the fees. The depositary may collect its annual fee for depositary services by deduction from cash distributions or by directly billing investors or by charging the book-entry system accounts of participants acting for them. The depositary may collect any of its fees by deduction from any cash distribution payable (or by selling a portion of securities or other property distributable) to ADS holders that are obligated to pay those fees. The depositary may generally refuse to provide fee-attracting services until its fees for those services are paid.

From time to time, the depositary may make payments to us to reimburse us for costs and expenses generally arising out of establishment and maintenance of the ADS program, waive fees and expenses for services

199

Table of Contents

provided to us by the depositary or share revenue from the fees collected from ADS holders. In performing its duties under the deposit agreement, the depositary may use brokers, dealers, foreign currency dealers or other service providers that are owned by or affiliated with the depositary and that may earn or share fees, spreads or commissions.

The depositary may convert currency itself or through any of its affiliates and, in those cases, acts as principal for its own account and not as agent, advisor, broker or fiduciary on behalf of any other person and earns revenue, including, without limitation, transaction spreads, that it will retain for its own account. The revenue is based on, among other things, the difference between the exchange rate assigned to the currency conversion made under the deposit agreement and the rate that the depositary or its affiliate receives when buying or selling foreign currency for its own account. The depositary makes no representation that the exchange rate used or obtained in any currency conversion under the deposit agreement will be the most favorable rate that could be obtained at the time or that the method by which that rate will be determined will be the most favorable to ADS holders, subject to the depositary's obligations under the deposit agreement. The methodology used to determine exchange rates used in currency conversions is available upon request.

200

Table of Contents

PART II

ITEM 13. DEFAULTS, DIVIDEND ARREARAGES AND DELINQUENCIES

Not applicable.

ITEM 14. MATERIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE RIGHTS OF SECURITY HOLDERS AND USE OF PROCEEDS

In May 2017, we sold 6,744,750 ADSs, each representing one ordinary share, with a nominal value of €0.10 per share, in our U.S. initial public offering at a price of $17.00 per ADS, including the exercise in full by the underwriters of their option to purchase additional ADSs. The offering closed on May 23, 2017 and was made pursuant to a registration statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-217417) filed on April 21, 2017, as amended, in the form in which it was declared effective by the SEC on May 17, 2017 and a registration statement on Form S-1MEF (File No. 333-218067), which was automatically effective upon filing with the SEC on May 17, 2017. Cowen and Company, LLC and Piper Jaffray & Co. acted as managing joint book-running managers, and JMP Securities LLC and Wedbush PacGrow Inc. acted as co-managers of the initial U.S. public offering. Kempen & Co. N.V. acted as our advisor in connection with the offering.

We received aggregate gross proceeds of approximately $114.6 million, or aggregate net offering proceeds to us, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses, of approximately $103.4 million. None of the underwriting discounts and commissions or offering expenses were paid to directors, officers or general partners of ours or their associates or to persons owning 10% or more of any class of our equity securities, or to any of our affiliates.

We have not used any of the net proceeds from the offering to make payments, directly or indirectly, to any director, officer or general partner of ours or to their associates, persons owning 10% or more of any class of our equity securities, or to any of our affiliates. We have invested the net proceeds from the offering in cash and cash equivalents and current financial assets. There has been no material change in our planned use of the net proceeds from the offering as described in our final prospectus filed pursuant to Rule 424(b)(4) under the Securities Act with the SEC on May 19, 2017.

ITEM 15. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(b) as of December 31, 2019. While there are inherent limitations to the effectiveness of any system of disclosure controls and procedures, including the possibility of human error and the circumvention or overriding of the controls and procedures, our disclosure controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable assurance of achieving their objectives.

Based upon our evaluation, as of December 31, 2019, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures, in accordance with Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e), are (i) effective at the level of reasonable assurance in ensuring that information required to be disclosed in the reports that are filed or submitted under the Exchange Act, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Commission’s rules and forms, and (ii) are effective at the level of reasonable assurance in ensuring that information to be disclosed in the reports that are filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to the management of our company, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

201

Table of Contents

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) and Rule 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act). Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed, under the supervision of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and preparation of financial statements for external reporting purposes in accordance with IFRS, as issued by the IASB.

Our internal control over financial reporting includes policies and procedures that pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly, reflect transactions and dispositions of assets, provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded in the manner necessary to permit the preparation of financial statements in accordance with IFRS, and that receipts and expenditures are only carried out in accordance with the authorization of our management and directors, and provide reasonable assurance regarding the prevention or timely detection of any unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on our financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect all misstatements. Moreover, projections of any evaluation of the effectiveness of internal control to future periods are subject to a risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions and that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Our management has assessed the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting based on the Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in 2013. Based on this assessment, our management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019 was effective.

The effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019 has been audited by Deloitte Accountants B.V., our independent registered public accounting firm. Their audit report, including their opinion on management’s assessment of internal control over financial reporting, is included in our audited consolidated financial statements included in this annual report.

Remediation Steps Taken to Address Prior Material Weaknesses

As of December 31, 2018, our management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was not effective based on COSO. A “material weakness” is defined as a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

The following is a description of the material weakness previously identified in our internal control over financial reporting: the company commenced the risk assessment process and the design and implementation of updated internal control frameworks for revenues and accounts receivable, other income, expenditure and payables, the financial closing and reporting process and general information technology controls (“GITC”). GITC deficiencies were identified related to the financial reporting system and the scope and conclusion of the service auditors’ reports for the service organizations relied upon by our accounting software. The risk assessment process and the design and implementation of these control frameworks were not completed as of December 31, 2018 primarily as a result of the GITC deficiencies and therefore effective risk assessment and monitoring activities were not implemented as of December 31, 2018.

Management concluded that its risk assessment process for the areas described above, did not adequately assess risk at an appropriate level of detail contemplating the GITC deficiencies to allow for (i) the design of controls with the appropriate precision and responsiveness to address those risks, (ii) the design of controls to validate the completeness and accuracy of data and financial reports generated by the affected financial reporting system and used in the performance of controls over the determination of significant estimates, accounting

202

Table of Contents

transactions and disclosures, (iii) the timely and effective implementation of controls, including evidence of operating effectiveness, and (iv) effective monitoring of the controls.

Accordingly, a reasonable possibility existed that a material misstatement of the company’s annual or interim financial statements would not have been prevented or detected on a timely basis by the company’s internal control. Management, including our CEO and CFO, concluded that internal controls over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2018.

We remediated the material weaknesses by taking the following actions:

| · |  | hired a full-time Internal Controls Manager to lead the monitoring and testing of internal controls over financial reporting;

| · |  | developed enhanced controls related to database administrator access with a specific focus on systems supporting our financial reporting processes and increased the frequency of user access review controls on privileged users;

| · |  | implemented an improvement plan together with our external information technology service provider; and

| · |  | enhanced the level of precision of our risk assessments andimproved quarterly reporting on the material weaknesses remediation status to the Audit Committee.

In addition, our remediation was designed and implemented to address the GITC deficiencies related to the financial reporting system and the scope and conclusion of the service auditors’ reports for the service organizations relied upon by argenx’s accounting software. The remediated controls have been tested by management and concluded to be designed and operating effectively. Management believes that as of December 31, 2019, the remediation actions implemented during 2019 effectively remediated the material weaknesses.

Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Except as described above, there have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

ITEM 16. RESERVED

Not applicable.

ITEM 16A. AUDIT COMMITTEE FINANCIAL EXPERT

Our board of directors has determined that Werner Lanthaler qualifies as an audit committee financial expert as defined by SEC rules and has the requisite financial sophistication under the applicable rules and regulations of the NASDAQ Stock Market. Dr. Lanthaler is independent under Rule 10A-3 of the Exchange Act.

ITEM 16B. CODE OF ETHICS

We adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, or the Code of Conduct, that is applicable to all of our employees and directors. The Code of Conduct is available on our website at www.argenx.com. The audit committee of our board of directors is responsible for overseeing the Code of Conduct and is required to approve any waivers of the Code of Conduct for employees and directors. We expect that any amendments to the Code of Conduct, and any waivers of its requirements, will be disclosed on our website.

203

Table of Contents

ITEM 16C. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

Deloitte Accountants B.V. has served as our independent registered public accounting firm for 2018 and 2019. Our accountants billed the following fees to us for professional services in each of those fiscal years:

|  | Year Ended December 31,
Fees |  | 2019 |  | 2018
|  |  | in thousands of €
Audit Fees |  | € | 730 |  | € | 648
Audit‑Related Fees |  |  | 159 |  |  | 143
Tax Fees |  |  | — |  |  | —
All Other Fees |  |  | — |  |  | —
Total |  | € | 889 |  | € | 791

“Audit Fees” are the aggregate fees billed for the audit of our annual financial statements. This category also includes services that generally the independent accountants provide, such as consents and assistance with and review of documents filed with the SEC.

“Audit-Related Fees” are the aggregate fees billed for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit and are not reported under Audit Fees. In 2019 and 2018, “Audit-Related Fees” also include fees billed for assurance and audit-related services regarding our public offerings on Nasdaq.

“Tax Fees” are the aggregate fees billed for professional services rendered by the principal accountant for tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning related services.

“All Other Fees” are any additional amounts billed for products and services provided by the principal accountant. No other fees were paid to Deloitte Accountants B.V. for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018.

Audit Committee’s Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures

The audit committee has responsibility for, among other things, appointing, setting compensation of and overseeing the work of our independent registered public accounting firm, or external auditor. In recognition of these responsibilities, the audit committee has adopted a policy governing the pre-approval of all audit and permitted non-audit services performed by our external auditor to ensure that the provision of such services does not impair the external auditor’s independence from us and our management. Unless a type of service to be provided by our external auditor has received general pre-approval from the audit committee, it requires specific pre-approval by the audit committee. The payment for any proposed services in excess of pre-approved cost levels requires specific pre-approval by the audit committee.

Pursuant to its pre-approval policy, the audit committee may delegate its authority to pre-approve services to the chairperson of the Audit Committee. The decisions of the chairperson to grant pre-approvals must be presented to the full audit committee at its next scheduled meeting. The audit committee may not delegate its responsibilities to pre-approve services to the management.

The audit committee has considered the non-audit services provided by Deloitte Accountants B.V. as described above and believes that they are compatible with maintaining Deloitte Accountants B.V.’s independence as our external auditor. In accordance with Regulation S-X, Rule 2-01, paragraph (c)(7)(i), no fees for services were approved pursuant to any waivers of the pre-approval requirement.

ITEM 16D. EXEMPTIONS FROM THE LISTING STANDARDS FOR AUDIT COMMITTEES

Not applicable.

204

Table of Contents

ITEM 16E. PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES BY THE ISSUER AND AFFILIATED PURCHASERS

Not applicable.

ITEM 16F. CHANGE IN REGISTRANT’S CERTIFYING ACCOUNTANT

Not applicable.

ITEM 16G. CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

We qualify as a foreign private issuer. The Listing Rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market include certain accommodations in the corporate governance requirements that allow foreign private issuers to follow “home country” corporate governance practices in lieu of the otherwise applicable corporate governance standards of the Nasdaq Stock Market. We intend to rely on the certain exemptions for foreign private issuers and to follow Dutch corporate governance practices in lieu of the Nasdaq corporate governance rules.

205

Table of Contents

The following is a summary of the significant ways in which our corporate governance practices differ from those required by the Nasdaq Listing Rules with which we are not required to comply:

| · |  | Quorum at Shareholder Meetings. In accordance with Dutch law and generally accepted business practices in the Netherlands, our Articles of Association do not provide quorum requirements generally applicable to general meetings of shareholders. To that extent, our practice varies from the requirement of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5620(c), which requires an issuer to provide in its bylaws for a generally applicable quorum, and that such quorum may not be less than one-third of the outstanding voting stock.

| · |  | Compensation and Nomination Committees. We have opted out of Nasdaq Listing Rules 5605(d)(2) and 5605(e)(1), which require separate nomination and compensation committees; however, for practical purposes, our remuneration and nomination committee performs similar tasks pursuant to Dutch law. We have also opted out of the requirements of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5605(d), which requires an issuer to have a compensation committee that consists entirely of independent directors, and Nasdaq Listing Rule 5605(e), which requires an issuer to have independent director oversight of director nominations. Although we have chosen not to comply with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5605(d) regarding the independence of our compensation committee, all of the current members of our remuneration and nomination committee meet the heightened independence requirements under these rules.

| · |  | Executive Sessions. Nasdaq Listing Rule 5605(b)(2) requires companies to have regularly scheduled meetings at which only independent directors of the company are present. There is no corresponding requirement under Dutch law. Our corporate governance charter requires our non-executive directors to meet without the presence of any executive directors; however, these meetings do not exclude our other non-independent directors and, therefore, we do not believe that we satisfy the requirements of Rule 5605(b)(2).

| · |  | Solicitation of Proxies. Although we must provide shareholders with an agenda and other relevant documents for the General Meeting, Dutch law does not have a regulatory regime for the solicitation of proxies, and the solicitation of proxies is not a generally accepted business practice in the Netherlands. Thus, our practice will vary from the requirement of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5620(b).

| · |  | Shareholder Approval. We have opted out of certain Dutch shareholder approval requirements for the issuance of securities in connection with certain events, such as the acquisition of stock or assets of another company, the establishment of or amendments to equity-based compensation plans for employees, changes of control and certain private placements. To that extent, our practice varies from the requirements of Nasdaq Rule 5635, which generally requires an issuer to obtain shareholder approval for the issuance of securities in connection with such events.

ITEM 16H. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURE

Not applicable.

206

Table of Contents

PART III

ITEM 17. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Not applicable.

ITEM 18. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

See pages F-1 through F-48 of this annual report.

ITEM 19. EXHIBITS

The Exhibits listed in the Exhibit Index at the end of this annual report are filed as Exhibits to this annual report.

207

Table of Contents

EXHIBIT INDEX

|  |  |  | Incorporated by Reference |
Exhibit |  | Description |  | Schedule/ Form |  | File Number |  |  | Exhibit |  |  | File Date (mm/dd/yyyy) |
1.1 |  | Articles of Association (English translation), as amended |  | Form F-1/A |  |  | 333-217417 |  |  |  | 3.1 |  |  |  | 05/04/2017 |
1.2 |  | Rules for the Board of Directors |  | Form F-1 |  |  | 333-217417 |  |  |  | 3.2 |  |  |  | 04/21/2017 |
2.1 |  | Form of Deposit Agreement |  | Form F-1/A |  |  | 333-217417 |  |  |  | 4.1 |  |  |  | 05/16/2017 |
2.2 |  | Form of American Depositary Receipt (included in Exhibit 2.1) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
2.3# |  | Description of Share Capital |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
4.1 |  | Leases dated April 1, 2016 between argenx BVBA and Bio-Incubator Gent 2 NV |  | Form F-1 |  |  | 333-217417 |  |  |  | 10.1 |  |  |  | 04/21/2017 |
4.2** |  | Patent License Agreement, dated February 15, 2012, between the registrant and The Board of Regents of the University of Texas System, as amended |  | Form F-1 |  |  | 333-217417 |  |  |  | 10.2 |  |  |  | 04/21/2017 |
4.3† |  | Form of Indemnification Agreement between the registrant and each of its executive officers and directors |  | Form F-1 |  |  | 333-217417 |  |  |  | 10.3 |  |  |  | 04/21/2017 |
4.4† |  | argenx option plan and form of option agreement and notice of option grant thereunder |  | Form F-1 |  |  | 333-221984 |  |  |  | 10.4 |  |  |  | 12/11/2017 |
4.5** |  | Collaboration License Agreement, dated December 2, 2018, between the registrant, argenx BVBA and Cilag GmbH International |  | Form 20-F |  |  | 001-38097 |  |  |  | 4.5 |  |  |  | 03/26/2019 |
4.6 |  | Investment Agreement, dated December 2, 2018, between the registrant and Johnson & Johnson Innovation – JJDC, Inc. |  | Form 20-F |  |  | 001-38097 |  |  |  | 4.6 |  |  |  | 03/26/2019 |

208

Table of Contents

8.1 |  | List of subsidiaries of the registrant |  | Form F-1 |  |  | 333-221984 |  |  |  | 21.1 |  |  |  | 12/11/2017 |
12.1# |  | Certification by the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
12.2# |  | Certification by the Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
13.1* |  | Certification by the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
13.2* |  | Certification by the Principal Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
15.1# |  | Consent of Deloitte Accountants B.V. |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
101.INS# |  | XBRL Instance Document |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
101.SCH# |  | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
101.CAL# |  | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
101.DEF# |  | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
101.LAB# |  | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
101.PRE# |  | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |

209

Table of Contents

# | Filed herewith.
* | Furnished herewith.
† | Indicates a management contract or any compensatory plan, contract or arrangement.
** | Confidential treatment status has been granted as to certain portions thereto, which portions are omitted and filed separately with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

210

Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

The registrant hereby certifies that it meets all of the requirements for filing on Form 20‑F and that it has duly caused and authorized the undersigned to sign this annual report on its behalf.

Date: March 31, 2020

|  | ARGENX SE
| By: | /s/ Tim Van Hauwermeiren
|  | Name: | Tim Van Hauwermeiren
|  | Title: | Chief Executive Officer

211

Table of Contents

INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Audited consolidated Financial Statements as of and for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 |
Reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm | F-2
Consolidated Statements of Financial Position | F-6
Consolidated Statements of Profit and Loss and Other Comprehensive Income | F-7
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows | F-8
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity | F-9
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements | F-10

F-1

Table of Contents

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Shareholders and the Board of Directors of argenx SE

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated statements of financial position of argenx SE and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, the related consolidated statements of profit and loss and other comprehensive income, cash flows, and changes in equity, for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2019, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the "financial statements"). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2019, in conformity with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated March 31, 2020, expressed an unqualified opinion on the Company's internal control over financial reporting.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company's financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Emphasis of a Matter

As discussed in Note 33 to the financial statements, the Company has described the potential effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the operations of the business. Our opinion is not modified in respect of this matter.

Critical Audit Matters

The critical audit matters communicated below are matters arising from the current-period audit of the financial statements that were communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that (1) relate to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (2) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matters below, providing separate opinions on the critical audit matters or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.

Revenue and Deferred Revenue - Determination of appropriate accounting of the global collaboration and license agreement - Refer to Note 17 to the financial statements

F-2

Table of Contents

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company recognized revenue of EUR 21.6 million on the basis of costs incurred and deferred revenue of EUR 289 million related to a global collaboration and license agreement entered into with Cilag AG, an affiliate of Johnson & Johnson as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019. The Company received USD 500 million as upfront payment for this collaboration and license agreement, consisting of USD 300 million upfront cash payment for the collaboration and license agreement and USD 200 million as equity investment in the Company.

The Company’s collaboration and license agreement has been determined as representing a single distinct performance obligation, due to the highly interdependent and interrelated nature of the development, manufacturing, and commercialization of the Licensed Compounds and Licensed Products. Fulfillment of the performance obligation occurs throughout the development, manufacturing, and commercialization phases of the Licensed Compounds and Licensed Products.

The Company recognizes the consideration received as deferred revenue and subsequently recognizes revenue over the contract term (“over time”) based on a research and development (“R&D”) cost input model using a percentage-of-completion method, whereby actual R&D cost incurred as part of the Company’s performance obligation is compared to the total expected R&D cost needed to satisfy the performance obligation at measurement date.

In determining the appropriate accounting treatment, the Company identified multiple performance obligations and concluded the license is not distinct from the promise to provide R&D services in the context of the contract. Given the subjective nature of this judgement and the potential impact on the revenue to be recognized, we identified the evaluation as to whether any promises or services described in the collaboration agreement should be considered as a distinct performance obligation in the context of the contract as a critical audit matter.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures for the accounting of the collaboration and license agreement included the following, among others:

| · |  | We tested the controls over the appropriateness of the accounting of the global collaboration and license agreement, including the review by management of the appropriate accounting treatment.

| · |  | We read the global collaboration and license agreement and evaluated whether management’s accounting position considered all relevant facts and terms included in the agreement.

| · |  | We further evaluated management’s accounting position paper and evaluated management’s conclusions to determine whether they had appropriately considered and applied the guidance and interpretation within IFRS 15.

| · |  | We have consulted with financial reporting experts on the critical judgements and the accounting treatment of the global collaboration and license agreement.

| · |  | We tested the mathematical accuracy of the deferred revenue position based on the revenue recognized and the total deferred revenue at inception of the contract.

Trade and Other Payables – Research and development cost accruals — Refer to Note 15 to the financial statements

Critical Audit Matter Description

The Company recognized costs of EUR 44.0 million, as specified in Note 15 to the financial statements, incurred for clinical trial activities as research and development expenses based on evaluation of its vendors’ progress toward completion of specific tasks. Payment timing may differ significantly from the period in which the costs are recognized as expense, resulting in Research and development cost accruals recognized within Trade and Other Payables in the Statement of Financial Position.

F-3

Table of Contents

Quantification of the research progress and the translation of the progress to the Research and development cost accruals requires judgment, because the progress is not directly observable. In estimating the vendors’ progress toward completion of specific tasks, the Company therefore uses data such as patient enrollment, clinical site activations and vendor information of actual costs incurred. This data is obtained through reports from or discussions with Company personnel and outside service providers as to the progress or state of completion of trials, or the completion of services. Costs are expensed over the service period the services are provided. Costs for services provided that have not yet been paid are recognized as accruals. R&D cost accruals directly impact the revenue recognized, given the Company records revenue based on the percentage of completion method.

We identified the Research and development cost accruals as a critical audit matter due to the number of ongoing clinical trial activities and the subjectivity involved in estimating Research and development cost accruals and as auditing the Research and development cost accruals involves judgement in evaluating the progress of the research and development activities relative to the costs incurred.

How the Critical Audit Matter Was Addressed in the Audit

Our audit procedures related to the Research and development cost accruals included the following, among others:

| · |  | We tested controls over the appropriateness of the recording of the R&D accruals reflecting the progress of the clinical trials, including the monthly review meetings between the finance department and clinical research personnel.

| · |  | We read selected research and collaboration agreements, as well as amendments thereto, to evaluate whether the progress of the clinical trials reflects all relevant contractual elements.

| · |  | We considered publicly available information (such as press releases and investor presentations) and board of directors’ materials regarding the status of clinical trial activities and compared this information to the judgements applied in recording the accruals and prepaid expenses.

| · |  | For a selection of contracts, we compared the amount of accrual at the end of the prior period to current year activity and evaluated the accuracy of the Company’s estimation methodology.

| · |  | We performed confirmation procedures related to the progress of the projects for significant vendors to test the R&D cost input model.

| · |  | We made selections of specific amounts recognized as R&D expense as well as those recognized as accrued expenses and performed the following procedures:

| o |  | Evaluated management’s estimate of the vendor’s progress based on inquiries with Company clinical operations personnel.

| o |  | Reconciled the related statement of work, purchase order, or other supporting documentation to management’s estimate (such as communications between the Company and vendors).

/s/ Deloitte Accountants B.V.

Rotterdam, the Netherlands

March 31, 2020

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2015.

F-4

Table of Contents

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Shareholders and the Board of Directors of argenx SE

Opinion on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of argenx SE and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2019, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019 of the Company and our report dated March 31, 2020, expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements and included an emphasis of matter regarding the potential effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the operations of the Company.

Basis for Opinion

The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying item 15 Controls and Procedures. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ Deloitte Accountants B.V.

Rotterdam, the Netherlands

March 31, 2020

F-5

Table of Contents

ARGENX SE

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL POSITION

|  |  |  | As of
|  |  |  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | Note |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
ASSETS |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Current assets |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Cash and cash equivalents |  | 11 |  | € | 331,282 |  | € | 281,040 |  | € | 190,867
Restricted cash — current |  | 8 |  |  | — |  |  | 1,692 |  |  | 1,692
Research and development incentive receivables — current |  | 7 |  |  | 261 |  |  | 301 |  |  | 158
Financial assets — current |  | 10 |  |  | 1,004,539 |  |  | 283,529 |  |  | 168,907
Prepaid expenses |  |  |  |  | 9,022 |  |  | 2,995 |  |  | 2,338
Trade and other receivables |  | 9 |  |  | 28,115 |  |  | 2,886 |  |  | 2,842
Total current assets |  |  |  |  | 1,373,219 |  |  | 572,443 |  |  | 366,804
Non‑current assets |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Restricted cash — non-current |  | 8 |  |  | 630 |  |  | 251 |  |  | 256
Research and development incentive receivables — non-current |  | 7 |  |  | 8,566 |  |  | 4,883 |  |  | 3,033
Other non-current assets |  |  |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 125
Financial assets — non-current |  | 6 |  |  | 2,596 |  |  | 1 |  |  | 1
Property, plant and equipment |  | 5 |  |  | 8,167 |  |  | 824 |  |  | 676
Intangible assets |  | 4 |  |  | 40,161 |  |  | 56 |  |  | 13
Total non‑current assets |  |  |  |  | 60,120 |  |  | 6,015 |  |  | 4,104
TOTAL ASSETS |  |  |  | € | 1,433,339 |  | € | 578,458 |  | € | 370,908

|  |  |  | As of
|  |  |  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | Note |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
EQUITY AND LIABILITIES |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Equity |  | 12 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Equity attributable to owners of the parent |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Share capital |  |  |  | € | 4,276 |  | € | 3,597 |  | € | 3,217
Share premium |  |  |  |  | 1,308,539 |  |  | 673,454 |  |  | 430,518
Accumulated losses |  |  |  |  | (332,568) |  |  | (169,603) |  |  | (100,568)
Other reserves |  |  |  |  | 70,499 |  |  | 30,947 |  |  | 11,764
Total equity |  |  |  | € | 1,050,746 |  | € | 538,395 |  | € | 344,931
Non-current liabilities |  |  |  |  | 222,636 |  |  | 7 |  |  | 1,460
Provisions for employee benefits |  | 14 |  |  | 64 |  |  | 7 |  |  | 25
Lease liabilities — non-current |  |  |  |  | 4,540 |  |  | — |  |  | —
Deferred revenue — non-current |  | 17 |  |  | 218,032 |  |  | — |  |  | 1,435
Current liabilities |  |  |  |  | 159,957 |  |  | 40,056 |  |  | 24,517
Lease liabilities — current |  |  |  |  | 1,974 |  |  | — |  |  | —
Trade and other payables |  | 15 |  |  | 85,301 |  |  | 37,072 |  |  | 15,285
Tax liabilities |  | 16 |  |  | 344 |  |  | 823 |  |  | 597
Deferred revenue — current |  | 17 |  |  | 72,338 |  |  | 2,161 |  |  | 8,635
Total liabilities |  |  |  | € | 382,593 |  | € | 40,063 |  | € | 25,977
TOTAL EQUITY AND LIABILITIES |  |  |  | € | 1,433,339 |  | € | 578,458 |  | € | 370,908

The notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-6

Table of Contents

ARGENX SE

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF PROFIT AND LOSS AND OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

|  |  |  |  | Year Ended
|  |  |  |  | December 31,
(in thousands of € except for shares and EPS) |  | Note |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Revenue |  | 17, 19 |  | € | 69,783 |  | € | 21,482 |  | € | 36,415
Other operating income |  | 18 |  |  | 12,801 |  |  | 7,749 |  |  | 4,841
Total operating income |  |  |  |  | 82,584 |  |  | 29,231 |  |  | 41,256
Research and development expenses |  | 20 |  |  | (197,665) |  |  | (83,609) |  |  | (51,740)
Selling, general and administrative expenses |  | 21 |  |  | (64,569) |  |  | (27,471) |  |  | (12,448)
Change in fair value on financials assets |  | 6 |  |  | 1,096 |  |  | — |  |  | —
Operating loss |  |  |  | € | (178,554) |  | € | (81,849) |  | € | (22,932)
Financial income |  | 24 |  |  | 14,399 |  |  | 3,694 |  |  | 1,250
Financial expense |  | 24 |  |  | (124) |  |  | — |  |  | —
Exchange gains/(losses) |  | 24 |  |  | 6,066 |  |  | 12,308 |  |  | (5,797)
Loss before taxes |  |  |  | € | (158,213) |  | € | (65,847) |  | € | (27,479)
Income tax expense |  | 25 |  | € | (4,752) |  | € | (794) |  | € | (597)
Loss for the year and total comprehensive loss |  |  |  | € | (162,965) |  | € | (66,641) |  | € | (28,076)
Loss for the year and total comprehensive loss attributable to: |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Owners of the parent |  |  |  | € | (162,965) |  | € | (66,641) |  | € | (28,076)
Weighted average number of shares outstanding |  |  |  |  | 38,619,121 |  |  | 33,419,356 |  |  | 24,609,536
Basic and diluted loss per share (in €) |  | 26 |  |  | (4.22) |  |  | (1.99) |  |  | (1.14)

The notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-7

Table of Contents

ARGENX SE

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

|  |  |  |  | Year Ended
|  |  |  |  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | Note |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
CASH FLOWS (USED IN) / FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Operating result |  |  |  | € | (178,554) |  | € | (81,849) |  | € | (22,932)
Adjustments for non-cash items |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Amortization of intangible assets |  | 4 |  |  | 38 |  |  | 19 |  |  | 10
Depreciation of property, plant and equipment |  | 5 |  |  | 2,128 |  |  | 474 |  |  | 425
Loss on disposal of fixed assets |  |  |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 11
Provisions for employee benefits |  | 14 |  |  | 57 |  |  | (18) |  |  | 24
Expense recognized in respect of share-based payments |  | 13 |  |  | 39,552 |  |  | 19,183 |  |  | 4,268
Fair value gains on financial assets at fair value through profit or loss |  | 6 |  |  | (1,096) |  |  | — |  |  | —
|  |  |  | € | (137,875) |  | € | (62,191) |  | € | (18,195)
Movements in current assets/liabilities |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
(Increase)/decrease in trade and other receivables |  | 10 |  |  | (22,965) |  |  | (44) |  |  | (122)
(Increase)/decrease in other current assets |  |  |  |  | (5,170) |  |  | (800) |  |  | (1,093)
Increase/(decrease) in trade and other payables |  | 15 |  |  | 47,995 |  |  | 21,784 |  |  | 3,094
Increase/(decrease) in deferred revenue – current |  | 17 |  |  | 62,106 |  |  | (8,868) |  |  | (11,501)
Movements in non-current assets/liabilities |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
(Increase)/decrease in other non‑current assets |  |  |  |  | (5,560) |  |  | (1,720) |  |  | (94)
(Increase)/decrease in deferred revenue – non-current |  | 17 |  |  | 200,533 |  |  | (1,435) |  |  | (8,635)
Cash flows (used in)/from operating activities |  |  |  |  | 139,064 |  |  | (53,274) |  |  | (36,546)
Interest paid |  |  |  |  | (124) |  |  | — |  |  | —
Income taxes paid |  |  |  |  | (4,356) |  |  | (565) |  |  | —
NET CASH FLOWS (USED IN) / FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES |  |  |  | € | 134,584 |  | € | (53,839) |  | € | (36,546)
CASH FLOWS (USED IN) / FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Purchase of intangible assets |  | 4 |  |  | (40,143) |  |  | (62) |  |  | (6)
Purchase of property, plant and equipment |  | 5 |  |  | (1,604) |  |  | (622) |  |  | (345)
(Increase)/decrease in financial assets – current |  | 10 |  |  | (708,060) |  |  | (108,229) |  |  | (162,076)
Interest received |  |  |  |  | 5,469 |  |  | 1,371 |  |  | 375
NET CASH FLOWS (USED IN) / FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES |  |  |  | € | (744,338) |  | € | (107,542) |  | € | (162,052)
CASH FLOWS (USED IN) / FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Principal elements of lease payments |  | 23 |  |  | (1,353) |  |  | — |  |  | —
Proceeds from issue of new shares, gross amount |  | 12 |  |  | 678,936 |  |  | 255,721 |  |  | 327,700
Issue costs paid |  | 12 |  |  | (22,999) |  |  | (14,655) |  |  | (23,015)
Exchange gain from currency conversion on proceeds from issue of new shares |  |  |  |  | — |  |  | 1,354 |  |  | —
Proceeds from exercise of stock options |  | 12 |  |  | 4,775 |  |  | 2,251 |  |  | 679
NET CASH FLOWS (USED IN) / FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES |  |  |  | € | 659,359 |  | € | 244,671 |  | € | 305,365
NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH & CASH EQUIVALENTS |  |  |  | € | 49,605 |  | € | 83,290 |  | € | 106,767
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period |  |  |  | € | 281,040 |  | € | 190,867 |  | € | 89,897
Exchange gains/(losses) on cash & cash equivalents |  |  |  | € | 637 |  | € | 6,883 |  | € | (5,797)
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the period |  |  |  | € | 331,282 |  | € | 281,040 |  | € | 190,867

The notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-8

Table of Contents

ARGENX SE

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY

|  | Attributable to owners of the parent
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Total |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | equity |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | attributable |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | to owners |  |  |  |
|  | Share |  | Share |  | Accumulated |  | Other |  | of the |  |  | Total
(in thousands of €) |  | capital |  | premium |  | losses |  | reserves |  | parent |  |  | equity
Balance at January 1, 2017 |  | € | 2,012 |  | € | 126,358 |  | € | (72,492) |  | € | 7,496 |  | € | 63,374 |  |  | € | 63,374
Total comprehensive loss of the period |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | (28,076) |  |  |  |  |  | (28,076) |  |  |  | (28,076)
Share-based payment |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 4,268 |  |  | 4,268 |  |  |  | 4,268
Issue of share capital |  |  | 1,185 |  |  | 326,515 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 327,700 |  |  |  | 327,700
Transaction costs for equity issue |  |  |  |  |  | (23,015) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | (23,015) |  |  |  | (23,015)
Exercise of stock options |  |  | 19 |  |  | 660 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 679 |  |  |  | 679
Balance year ended December 31, 2017 |  | € | 3,216 |  | € | 430,518 |  | € | (100,568) |  | € | 11,764 |  | € | 344,931 |  |  | € | 344,931
Adoption of IFRS 15 (modified retrospective approach) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | (2,395) |  |  |  |  |  | (2,395) |  |  |  | (2,395)
Restated total equity at January 1, 2018 |  | € | 3,216 |  | € | 430,518 |  | € | (102,962) |  | € | 11,764 |  | € | 342,536 |  |  | € | 342,536
Total comprehensive loss of the period |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | (66,641) |  |  |  |  |  | (66,641) |  |  |  | (66,641)
Share-based payment |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 19,183 |  |  | 19,183 |  |  |  | 19,183
Issue of share capital |  |  | 347 |  |  | 255,374 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 255,721 |  |  |  | 255,721
Transaction costs for equity issue |  |  |  |  |  | (14,655) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | (14,655) |  |  |  | (14,655)
Exercise of stock options |  |  | 34 |  |  | 2,217 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 2,251 |  |  |  | 2,251
Balance year ended December 31, 2018 |  | € | 3,597 |  | € | 673,454 |  | € | (169,603) |  | € | 30,947 |  | € | 538,395 |  |  | € | 538,395
Total comprehensive loss of the period |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | (162,965) |  |  |  |  |  | (162,965) |  |  |  | (162,965)
Share-based payment |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 39,552 |  |  | 39,552 |  |  |  | 39,552
Issue of new shares |  |  | 637 |  |  | 678,299 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 678,936 |  |  |  | 678,936
Transaction costs for equity issue |  |  |  |  |  | (22,999) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | (22,999) |  |  |  | (22,999)
Accounting treatment of the share subscription agreement |  |  |  |  |  | (24,948) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | (24,948) |  |  |  | (24,948)
Exercise of stock options |  |  | 42 |  |  | 4,733 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 4,775 |  |  |  | 4,775
Balance year ended December 31, 2019 |  | € | 4,276 |  | € | 1,308,539 |  | € | (332,568) |  | € | 70,499 |  | € | 1,050,746 |  |  | € | 1,050,746

Please refer to note 12 for more information on the share capital and movement in number of shares. See also note 13 for more information on the share-based payments.

The notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-9

Table of Contents

ARGENX SE

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

1. General information about the company

argenx SE is a Dutch European public company with limited liability incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands. The company (COC 24435214) has its official seat in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and its registered office is at Willemstraat 5, 4811 AH, Breda, the Netherlands. An overview of the company and its subsidiaries (the Company) are described in note 32.

argenx SE is a publicly traded company with ordinary shares listed on Euronext Brussels under the symbol “ARGX” since July 2014 and with American Depositary Shares listed on Nasdaq under the symbol “ARGX” since May 2017.

2. Significant accounting policies

The significant Company’s accounting policies are summarized below.

2.1 Statement of compliance and basis of preparation

The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and the interpretations issued by the IASB’s International Financial Reporting Interpretation Committee. The consolidated financial statements provide a general overview of the Company’s activities and the results achieved. They present fairly the entity’s financial position, its financial performance and cash flows, on a going concern basis. The accounting policies described in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements have been applied in preparing the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019 and for the comparative information as of and for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017.

The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with IFRS, issued by the IASB, requires the use of certain critical accounting estimates. It also requires management to exercise its judgment in the process of applying the Company’s accounting policies. The areas involving a higher degree of judgment or complexity, or areas where assumptions and estimates are significant to the consolidated financial statements are disclosed in Note 3.

The significant accounting policies applied in the preparation of the above consolidated financial statements are set out below. All amounts are presented in thousands of euro, unless otherwise indicated, rounded to the nearest € ‘000.

The consolidated financial statements have been approved for issue by the Company’s Board of Directors (the Board) on March 31, 2020.

2.2 Basis of consolidation

The consolidated financial statements include the financial statements of the Company and entities controlled by the Company (its subsidiaries). Control is achieved when the Company:

| · |  | has power over the investee;

| · |  | is exposed, or has rights, to variable returns from its involvement with the investee; and

| · |  | has the ability to use its power to affect its returns.

The Company reassesses whether or not it controls an investee if facts and circumstances indicate that there are changes to one or more of the three elements of control listed above.

F-10

Table of Contents

Consolidation of a subsidiary begins when the Company obtains control over the subsidiary and ceases when the Company loses control of the subsidiary. Income and expenses of subsidiaries acquired or disposed of during the year are included in the consolidated statement of profit and loss and other comprehensive income from the effective date of acquisition and up to the effective date of disposal, as appropriate.

When necessary, adjustments are made to the financial statements of subsidiaries to bring their accounting policies into line with those used by other members of the Group.

All inter-company transactions and unrealized gains on transactions between group companies are eliminated. Unrealised losses are also eliminated unless the transaction provides evidence of an impairment of the transferred asset. Accounting policies of subsidiaries have been changed where necessary to ensure consistency with the policies adopted by the Group.

2.3 Foreign currency transactions

Functional and presentation currency

The consolidated financial statements are presented in euro (€), which is the Company’s presentation currency and the Company’s functional currency.

Transactions and balances

Transactions in foreign currencies are translated at the exchange rate ruling at the date of the transaction. Monetary assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are translated at the exchange rate ruling at the reporting date. Foreign exchange differences arising on translation are recognized in the statement of profit and loss and other comprehensive income. Non‑monetary assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are translated at the foreign exchange rate ruling at the date of the transaction.

Financial statements of foreign entities

For foreign entities using a different functional currency than the euro:

| · |  | assets and liabilities for each balance sheet presented are translated at the closing rate at the date of that statement of financial position.

| · |  | income and expenses for each statement presenting profit or loss and other comprehensive income are translated at average exchange rates (unless this average is not a reasonable approximation of the cumulative effect of the rates prevailing on the transaction dates, in which case income and expenses are translated at the rate on the dates of the transactions).

| · |  | all resulting exchange differences are recognised in other comprehensive income.

2.4 Intangible assets

2.4.1 Internally generated intangible assets

Expenditure on research activities is recognized as an expense in the period in which it is incurred.

An internally‑generated intangible asset arising from development (or from the development phase of an internal project) is recognized if, and only if, all of the following have been demonstrated:

| · |  | the technical feasibility of completing the intangible asset so that it will be available for use or sale;

| · |  | the intention to complete the intangible asset and use or sell it;

| · |  | the ability to use or sell the intangible asset;

F-11

Table of Contents

| · |  | how the intangible asset will generate probable future economic benefits;

| · |  | the availability of adequate technical, financial and other resources to complete the development and to use or sell the intangible asset; and

| · |  | the ability to measure reliably the expenditure attributable to the intangible asset during its development.

The amount initially recognized for internally‑generated intangible assets is the sum of the expenditure incurred from the date when the intangible asset first meets the recognition criteria listed above. Where no internally‑generated intangible asset can be recognized, development expenditures are recognized in the statement of profit and loss and other comprehensive income in the period in which they are incurred.

Due to uncertainties inherent to the development and registration with the relevant healthcare authorities of its products, the Company estimates that the conditions for capitalization are not met until the regulatory procedures required by such healthcare authorities have been finalized. The Company currently does not own products that have been approved by the relevant healthcare authorities.

Subsequent to initial recognition, internally‑generated intangible assets are reported at cost less accumulated amortization and accumulated impairment losses, on the same basis as intangible assets that are acquired separately.

2.4.2 Intangible assets acquired separately

Intangible assets with finite useful lives that are acquired separately are carried at cost less accumulated amortization and accumulated impairment losses. Amortization is recognized on a straight‑line basis over their estimated useful lives which are disclosed in note 4. The estimated useful life and amortization method are reviewed at the end of each reporting period, with the effect of any changes in estimate being accounted for on a prospective basis. Intangible assets with indefinite useful lives that are acquired separately are carried at cost less accumulated impairment losses.

Payments for acquired in-process research and development projects obtained through in-licensing arrangements, business combinations and separate asset purchases are capitalized as intangible assets provided that they are separately identifiable, controlled by the Company and expected to provide future economic benefits. As the probability criterion in IAS 38 is always considered to be satisfied for separately acquired research and development assets and the amount of the payments is determinable, upfront and milestone payments to third parties for pharmaceutical products or compounds for which regulatory marketing approval has not yet been obtained are recognized as intangible assets, and amortized on a straight line basis over their useful lives beginning when the underlying drug candidate is approved and launched commercially, or expensed immediately if development of the drug candidate is abandoned.

2.4.3 Derecognition of intangible assets

An intangible asset is derecognized either on disposal or when no future economic benefits are expected from its use. Gains or losses arising from derecognition of an intangible asset, measured as the difference between the net disposal proceeds and the carrying amount of the asset, are recognized in profit or loss when the asset is derecognized.

2.5 Property, plant and equipment

Items of property, plant and equipment held for use in the production or supply of goods or services, or for administrative purposes, are stated in the statement of financial position at their cost, less accumulated depreciation and accumulated impairment losses.

The cost comprises the initial purchase price plus other direct purchase costs (such as non‑refundable tax and transport).

F-12

Table of Contents

Depreciation is recognized as from acquisition date onwards (unless asset is not ready for use) so as to write off the cost or valuation of assets (other than freehold land and properties under construction) less their residual values over their useful lives, using the straight‑line method. The estimated useful lives, residual values and depreciation method are reviewed at the end of each reporting period, with the effect of any changes in estimate accounted for on a prospective basis.

Unless revised due to specific changes in the estimated useful life, annual depreciation rates are as follows:

| · |  | Office and lab equipment: 3–5 years

| · |  | IT equipment: 3 years

An item of property, plant and equipment is derecognized upon disposal or when no future economic benefits are expected to arise from the continued use of the asset. Any gain or loss arising on the disposal or retirement of an item of property, plant and equipment is determined as the difference between the sales proceeds and the carrying amount of the asset and is recognized in profit or loss.

2.6 Leases

As explained in note 2.22 below, the Company has changed its accounting policy for leases where the Company is the lessee.

Until December 31, 2018, leases of property, plant and equipment where the Company, as lessee, had substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership were classified as finance leases. Finance leases were capitalised at the lease’s inception at the fair value of the leased property or, if lower, the present value of the minimum lease payments. The corresponding rental obligations, net of finance charges, were included in other short-term and long-term payables. Each lease payment was allocated between the liability and finance cost. The finance cost was charged to the profit or loss over the lease period so as to produce a constant periodic rate of interest on the remaining balance of the liability for each period. The property, plant and equipment acquired under finance leases was depreciated over the asset’s useful life or over the shorter of the asset’s useful life and the lease term if there is no reasonable certainty that the Company will obtain ownership at the end of the lease term.

Leases in which a significant portion of the risks and rewards of ownership were not transferred to the Company as lessee were classified as operating leases. Operating lease payments were recognized as an expense on a straight‑line basis over the lease term, except where another systematic basis was more representative of the time pattern in which economic benefits from the leased asset are consumed.

As from January 1, 2019, the Company assesses whether a contract is or contains a lease, at inception of the contract. The Company recognises a right-of-use asset and a corresponding lease liability with respect to all lease arrangements in which it is the lessee, except for short-term leases (defined as leases with a lease term of 12 months or less) and leases of low value assets. For these leases, the Company recognises the lease payments as an operating expense on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease unless another systematic basis is more representative of the time pattern in which economic benefits from the leased assets are consumed.

The lease liability is initially measured at the present value of the lease payments that are not paid at the commencement date, discounted by using the rate implicit in the lease. If this rate cannot be readily determined, the lessee uses its incremental borrowing rate. The lease liability is subsequently measured by increasing the carrying amount to reflect interest on the lease liability (using the effective interest method) and by reducing the carrying amount to reflect the lease payments made. The lease liability is presented as a separate line in the consolidated statement of financial position.

The right-of-use assets comprise the initial measurement of the corresponding lease liability, lease payments made at or before the commencement day, less any lease incentives received and any initial direct costs. They are subsequently measured at cost less accumulated depreciation and impairment losses. Right-of-use assets are depreciated over the shorter period of lease term and useful life of the underlying asset. If a lease transfers ownership of the underlying asset or the cost of the right-of-use asset reflects that the Company expects

F-13

Table of Contents

to exercise a purchase option, the related right-of-use asset is depreciated over the useful life of the underlying asset. The right-of-use assets are presented in the statement of financial position under the caption “Property, plant and equipment”.

2.7 Impairment of assets

At the end of each reporting period, the Company reviews the carrying amounts of its tangible and intangible assets to determine whether there is any indication that those assets have suffered an impairment loss. If any such indication exists, the recoverable amount of the asset is estimated in order to determine the extent of the impairment loss (if any). Where it is not possible to estimate the recoverable amount of an individual asset, the Company estimates the recoverable amount of the cash‑generating unit to which the asset belongs.

Intangible assets with indefinite useful lives and intangible assets not yet available for use are tested for impairment at least annually, and whenever there is an indication that the asset may be impaired.

Recoverable amount is the higher of fair value less costs to sell and value in use. In assessing value in use, the estimated future cash flows are discounted to their present value using a pre‑tax discount rate that reflects current market assessments of the time value of money and the risks specific to the asset for which the estimates of future cash flows have not been adjusted.

If the recoverable amount of an asset (or cash‑generating unit) is estimated to be less than its carrying amount, the carrying amount of the asset (or cash‑generating unit) is reduced to its recoverable amount. An impairment loss is recognized immediately in profit or loss.

Where an impairment loss subsequently reverses, the carrying amount of the asset (or a cash‑generating unit) is increased to the revised estimate of its recoverable amount, but so that the increased carrying amount does not exceed the carrying amount that would have been determined had no impairment loss been recognized for the asset (or cash‑generating unit) in prior years. A reversal of an impairment loss is recognized immediately in profit or loss.

2.8 Financial assets: investments

(i) Classification

The Company classifies its financial assets in the following measurement categories: those to be measured subsequently at fair value through profit or loss (FVTPL) and those to be measured at amortized cost. The classification depends on the Company’s business model for managing the financial assets and the contractual terms of the cash flows.

Regular purchases and sales of financial assets are recognized on the trade date – the date on which the Company commits to purchase or sell the asset. Financial assets are derecognized when the rights to receive cash flows from the investments have expired or have been transferred and the Company has transferred substantially all risks and rewards of ownership. For assets measured at fair value, gains and losses will be recorded in profit or loss.

(ii) Measurement

At initial recognition, the Company measures a financial asset at its fair value plus, in case of a financial asset not at FVTPL, transaction costs that are directly attributable to the acquisition of the financial asset. Transaction costs of financial assets carried at FVTPL are expensed in profit or loss.

The Company subsequently measures all equity investments at fair value. Dividends from such investments continue to be recognized in profit or loss as financial income when the Company’s right to receive payments is established. Changes in the fair value of financial assets at FVPL are recognized in financial income/expenses in the statement of profit or loss. The fair value of listed investments is based on current market prices. If the market for a financial asset is not active (and for unlisted securities), the Company establishes fair value by using valuation techniques.

F-14

Table of Contents

2.9 Trade and other receivables

Trade receivables are recognised initially at the amount of consideration that is unconditional. The Company holds the trade receivables with the objective to collect the contractual cash flows and therefore measures them subsequently at amortised cost using the effective interest method. Unless the impact of discounting is material, the nominal value is recognized.

Trade receivables are recognized initially at their transaction price and are subsequently measured at amortized cost using the effective interest rate method, less provision for expected credit losses. For determining the expected credit losses, the Company applies the simplified approach permitted by IFRS 9, which requires lifetime losses to be recognized from initial recognition of the receivables.

2.10 Research and development incentive receivables

Since the Company carries out extensive research and development activities, it benefits from a research and development incentive tax scheme in Belgium under which the research and development incentives can be refunded after five years if not offset against future income tax expense. These research and development incentives generally aim to partly reimburse expenditures incurred in our research and development efforts and are credited to the statement of profit or loss under the line “Other operating income” when the relevant expenditure has been incurred and there is a reasonable assurance that the research and development incentives are receivable.

2.11 Cash and cash equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents includes cash in hand, deposits held at call with banks and other short term highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less and with an insignificant risk of changes in value. Bank overdrafts, if any, are shown within borrowings in current liabilities on the statement of financial position.

Cash balances that are not available for use by the Company are presented as “restricted cash” in the statement of financial position.

For the purpose of the statements of cash flows, cash and cash equivalents includes cash on hand and deposits held at call or short term maturity with banks (three months or less with insignificant risk of changes in value).

2.12 Shareholder’s equity

An equity instrument is any contract that evidences a residual interest in the assets of an entity after deducting all of its liabilities. Equity instruments issued by the Company are recognized at the proceeds received, net of direct issue costs.

The Company has never distributed any dividends to its shareholders. As of December 31, 2019, no profits were available for distribution.

2.13 Trade and other payables

Payables after and within one year are measured at amortized cost, i.e., at the net present value of the payable amount. Unless the impact of discounting is material, the nominal value is recognized.

2.14 Provisions

Provisions are recognized when the Company has a present obligation (legal or constructive) as a result of a past event, it is probable that the Company will be required to settle the obligation, and a reliable estimate can be made of the amount of the obligation.

The amount recognized as a provision is the best estimate of the consideration required to settle the present obligation at the end of the reporting period, taking into account the risks and uncertainties surrounding the

F-15

Table of Contents

obligation. When a provision is measured using the cash flows estimated to settle the present obligation, its carrying amount is the present value of those cash flows (where the effect of the time value of money is material).

When some or all of the economic benefits required to settle a provision are expected to be recovered from a third party, a receivable is recognized as an asset if it is reasonably certain that reimbursement will be received and the amount of the receivable can be measured reliably.

2.15 Retirement benefits

The Company offers a post‑employment, death, disability and healthcare benefit scheme. All employees have access to these schemes. The death, disability and healthcare benefits granted to employees of the Company are covered by an external insurance company, where premiums are paid annually and charged to the income statement as they were incurred.

The post‑employment pension plan granted to employees of the Company is a defined contribution plan under Belgian Law.

Under defined contribution plans, the Company pays contributions based on salaries to organizations responsible for paying out pensions and social security benefits, in accordance with the laws and agreements applicable in each country.

The Belgian defined contribution pension plans are by law subject to minimum guaranteed rates of return, historically 3.25% on employer contributions and 3.75% on employee contributions. These rates have been modified by the law of December 18, 2015 and effective for contribution paid as from 2016 to a new variable minimum return based on the OLO (‘Obligation Lineaire Obligaties’—Belgian Government Bond) rates, with a minimum of 1.75% and a maximum of 3.75%. Hence, from 2016 onwards, these plans are accounted for as defined benefit plans (see note 14).

The liability recognized in the balance sheet is the present value of the defined benefit obligation less the fair value of plan assets. An independent actuary calculates the defined benefit obligation based on factors such as age, years of service and compensation (projected unit credit method). The present value of the defined benefit obligation is determined by discounting the estimated future cash outflows using interest rates of high‑quality corporate bonds denominated in the currency in which the benefits will be paid and with terms to maturity that approximate the term when the related liability is due. Current service costs are recognized in personnel expenses, which are included in Research and development expenses and in Selling, general and administrative expenses, and reflect the increase in the defined benefit obligation resulting from employee service in the current year. Past service costs are recognized immediately in personnel expenses. The net interest expense on the defined benefit liability is determined by applying the discount rate used to measure the defined benefit obligation at the beginning of the year to the then net defined benefit liability. Net interest expense is recognized in personnel expenses. Remeasurement gains and losses of the defined benefit obligation arising from experience adjustments and changes in actuarial assumptions are recognized immediately in other comprehensive income.

2.16 Short‑term employee benefits

Short‑term employee benefits include payables and accruals for salaries and bonuses to be paid to the employees of the Company. They are recognized as expenses for the period in which employees perform the corresponding services.

2.17 Share‑based payments

Equity‑settled share‑based payments to employees and others providing similar services are measured at the fair value of the equity instruments at the grant date. Details regarding the determination of the fair value of equity‑settled share‑based transactions are set out in note 13.

The fair value determined at the grant date of the equity‑settled share‑based payments is expensed on a straight‑line basis over the vesting period, based on the Company’s estimate of equity instruments that will eventually vest, with a corresponding increase in equity. At the end of each reporting period, the Company revises its estimate of the number of equity instruments expected to vest. The impact of the revision of the original

F-16

Table of Contents

estimates, if any, is recognized in profit or loss such that the cumulative expense reflects the revised estimate, with a corresponding adjustment to the equity‑settled share‑based payment reserve.

Where the terms of equity‑settled share‑based payments are modified, the minimum expense recognized is the expense that would have been recognized if the terms had not been modified. An additional expense is recognized for any modification that increases the total fair value of the share‑based payments, or is otherwise beneficial to the employee as measured at the date of modification.

2.18 Deferred revenue

Current and non-current deferred revenue relates to cash received from commercial partnerships prior to completion of the earnings process. These payments are recognized as revenue over the estimated duration of the Company’s involvement in the research and development programs provided for under the terms of the agreements.

IFRS 15 uses the term ‘contract liability’ to describe what might more commonly be known as ‘deferred revenue’, however IFRS 15 does not prohibit an entity from using alternative descriptions in the statement of financial position. The Company will continue to report its contract liabilities under the term ‘deferred revenue.

2.19 Income taxes

Income tax expense represents the sum of the tax currently payable and deferred tax.

The tax currently payable is based on taxable profit for the year. Taxable profit differs from profit as reported in the statement of profit and loss and other comprehensive income because of items of income or expense that are taxable or deductible in other years and items that are never taxable or deductible. The Company’s liability for current tax is calculated using tax rates that have been enacted or substantively enacted by the end of the reporting period.

Deferred tax is recognized on temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in the consolidated financial statements and the corresponding tax basis used in the computation of taxable profit (e.g. differences between carrying amounts under IFRS and the statutory tax basis). Deferred tax liabilities are generally recognized for all taxable temporary differences. Deferred tax assets are generally recognized for all deductible temporary differences to the extent that it is probable that taxable profits will be available against which those deductible temporary differences can be utilized. Such deferred tax assets and liabilities are not recognized if the temporary difference arises from goodwill or from the initial recognition (other than in a business combination) of other assets and liabilities in a transaction that affects neither the taxable profit nor the accounting profit.

The carrying amount of deferred tax assets is reviewed at the end of each reporting period and reduced to the extent that it is no longer probable that sufficient taxable profits will be available to allow all or part of the asset to be recovered.

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured at the tax rates that are expected to apply in the period in which the liability is settled or the asset realized, based on tax rates (and tax laws) that have been enacted or substantially enacted by the end of the reporting period. The measurement of deferred tax liabilities and assets reflects the tax consequences that would follow from the manner in which the Company expects, at the end of the reporting period, to recover or settle the carrying amount of its assets and liabilities.

Deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities are offset if there is a legally enforceable right to offset current tax assets and liabilities and if they relate to income taxes imposed by the same authority on the same taxable entity or in different tax entities that intend to settle current tax assets and liabilities on a net basis or their tax assets and liabilities will be realized simultaneously.

2.20 Revenue and other operating income recognition

Collaborations

The Company adopted IFRS 15 on January 1, 2018. The Company elected the modified retrospective approach for the transition, which foresees that prior period figures remain as reported under the previous standard

F-17

Table of Contents

IAS 18, and the cumulative effect of applying IFRS 15 is recognized as an adjustment to the opening balance of equity as at the date of initial application (i.e., the beginning of the year 2018). In previous reporting periods, milestone payments were recognized under IAS 18 based upon the achievement of the milestone event, whereas under IFRS 15, the milestone payment is linked to a single performance obligation over the estimated service period. The revenue recognition of the upfront payments was not impacted by the transition from IAS 18 to IFRS 15.

The cumulative effect of adopting IFRS 15 to the consolidated statement of financial position as of January 1, 2018 was as follows:

(in thousands of €) |  |  | Balance at December 31, 2017 |  |  | Adjustments due to adoption IFRS 15 |  |  | Balance at January 1, 2018
Assets |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Prepaid expenses |  | € | 2,338 |  | € | (255) |  | € | 2,083
Liabilities |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Deferred revenue — non-current |  | € | 1,435 |  | € | 378 |  | € | 1,813
Deferred revenue — current |  |  | 8,635 |  |  | 2,272 |  |  | 10,907
Equity |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Accumulated losses |  | € | (100,568) |  | € | (2,395) |  | € | (102,962)

The Company generates revenue from collaborations and strategic alliances. The Company applies a five-step model to determine when, how and at what amount revenue is to be recognized depending on whether certain criteria are met.

1. Identify the contracts

In our current arrangements, the Company is licensing its Intellectual Property, providing research and development services and in the future, selling its products to collaborative partner entities. Revenue is generated through these arrangements via upfront payments, milestone payments based on development criteria, research and development service fees on an agreed full-time equivalent (FTE) basis and future sales based milestones and sales based royalties.

2. Identify performance obligations

The Company has assessed that there is one single performance obligation in our material ongoing license and collaboration arrangements, being the transfer of a license combined with performance of research and development services.

This is because we consider that the performance obligations cannot be distinct in the context of the contract as the license has no stand-alone value without the Company being further involved in the research and development collaboration and that there is interdependence between the license and the research and development services to be provided. We estimate that the Company’s activities during the collaboration are going to significantly add to Intellectual Property and thereby the value of the programs.

3. Determine the transaction price

We have analyzed the transaction prices of our material ongoing license and collaboration arrangements currently composed of upfront payments, milestone payments and research and development service fees being delivered. Any variable consideration, such as development milestone payments that are promised in exchange for development services or the license of IP, is only included in the transaction price as from the moment the achievement of the related milestone event is highly probable (usually at the time of achievement of the milestone event). At the end of each subsequent reporting period, the Company re-evaluates the probability of achievement of such milestones and any related constraint, and, if necessary, adjusts the estimate of the overall transaction price. Any such adjustments are recorded on a cumulative catch-up basis, which would affect revenue and earnings in the period of adjustment. The Company’s collaborators may be required to pay the Company sales-based milestone

F-18

Table of Contents

payments or royalties on future sales of commercial products. The Company recognizes revenues related to sales-based milestone and royalty payments upon the later to occur of (i) achievement of the collaborator’s underlying sales or (ii) satisfaction of any performance obligation(s) related to these sales, in each case assuming the license to the Company’s intellectual property is deemed to be the predominant item to which the sales-based milestones and/or royalties relate.

4. Allocate the transaction price

In principle, an entity shall allocate the transaction price to each performance obligation identified in the contract on a relative stand-alone selling price basis. However, the transaction price of certain of our arrangements is allocated to a single performance obligation since the transfer of a license is considered to be combined with performance of research and development services.

Therefore, research and development milestone payments are variable considerations that are entirely allocated to the single performance obligation.

5. Recognize revenue

Revenue from certain arrangements is recognized over time as the Company satisfies a single performance obligation. Our collaborative partner entities simultaneously receive the benefits provided by the Company’s performance as the Company performs.

The Company recognizes upfront payments and milestone payments, allocated to a single performance obligation over the estimated service period based on a pattern that reflects the transfer of the services. The revenues recognized reflect the level of service each period. In this case, the Company would use an input model that considers estimates of the percentage of total research and development service costs that are completed each period compared to the total estimated services costs (percentage of completion method).

Research and development service fees are recognized as revenue when costs are incurred and agreed by the parties as the Company is acting as a principal in the scope of its stake of the research and development activities of its ongoing license and collaboration agreements.

Grants, research and development incentives and payroll tax rebates

Because it carries out extensive research and development activities, the Company benefits from various grants, research and development incentives and payroll tax rebates from certain governmental agencies. These grants, research and development incentives and payroll tax rebates generally aim to partly reimburse approved expenditures incurred in research and development efforts of the Company and are credited to the statement of profit and loss and other comprehensive income, under other operating income, when the relevant expenditure has been incurred and there is reasonable assurance that the grants or research and development incentives are receivable.

2.21 Earnings per share

Basic net profit / (loss) per share is computed based on the weighted average number of ordinary shares outstanding during the period, excluding treasury shares.

Diluted net profit / (loss) per share is computed based on the weighted‑average number of ordinary shares outstanding including the dilutive effect of options. Options should be treated as dilutive, when and only when their conversion to ordinary shares would decrease net profit per share from continuing operations.

F-19

Table of Contents

2.22 Adoption of new and revised standards

New accounting policies and disclosures for 2019

The following new standard is mandatory for the first time for the financial year beginning on or after January 1, 2019:

■ IFRS 16, ‘Leases’ (effective for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2019). This standard replaces the current guidance in IAS 17 and is a far reaching change in accounting by lessees in particular. Under IAS 17, lessees were required to make a distinction between a finance lease (on balance sheet) and an operating lease (off balance sheet). IFRS 16 requires lessees to recognise a lease liability reflecting future lease payments and a ‘right-of-use asset’ for virtually all lease contracts. For lessors, the accounting stays almost the same. However, as the IASB has updated the guidance on the definition of a lease (as well as the guidance on the combination and separation of contracts), lessors will also be affected by the new standard. Under IFRS 16, a contract is, or contains, a lease if the contract conveys the right to control the use of an identified asset for a period of time in exchange for consideration.

The Company has adopted IFRS 16 on January 1, 2019. The Company elected to apply the modified retrospective approach for the transition, which foresees that prior period figures remain as reported under the previous standard IAS 17, and the cumulative effect of applying IFRS 16 is recognized as an adjustment to the opening balance of equity as of the date of initial application (i.e., the beginning of the year 2019). On adoption of IFRS 16, the Company recognized lease liabilities in relation to leases which had previously been classified as ‘operating leases’ under IAS 17. These liabilities were measured at the present value of the remaining lease payments and discounted using the Company’s incremental borrowing rate as of January 1, 2019. The Company’s weighted average incremental borrowing rate applied to these lease liabilities on January 1, 2019 was 1.32%.

The differences between our total operating lease commitments as reported in note 5.7 of our consolidated financial statements of December 31, 2018 and the total lease liabilities recognized in our statement of financial position as at January 1, 2019 are summarized below:

(in thousands of €) |  |  |
Operating lease commitments disclosed as at December 31, 2018 |  | € | 3,004
Less: discounting effect using the lessee's incremental borrowing rate of the date of initial application |  | € | (126)
Less: short-term leases recognized on a straight-line basis as expense |  | € | (88)
Lease liability recognized as at January 1, 2019 |  | € | 2,790
of which are: |  |  |
Current lease liabilities |  | € | 1,078
Non-current lease liabilities |  | € | 1,712

The cumulative effect of adopting IFRS 16 to the consolidated statement of financial position as of January 1, 2019 is as follows:

(in thousands of €) |  |  |
Property, plant and equipment (right-of-use assets) |  | € | 2,790
Effect on total assets |  | € | 2,790
Lease liabilities (current and non-current) |  | € | 2,790
Effect on total equity and liabilities |  | € | 2,790

F-20

Table of Contents

The adoption of IFRS 16 does not have a significant impact on the metrics used to measure financial performance. In applying IFRS 16 for the first time, the Company has used the following practical expedients permitted by the standard:

| · |  | the use of a single discount rate to a portfolio of leases with reasonably similar characteristics;

| · |  | reliance on previous assessments on whether leases are onerous;

| · |  | the accounting for operating leases with a remaining lease term of less than 12 months as at January 1, 2019 as short-term leases; and

| · |  | the use of hindsight in determining the lease term where the contract contains options to extend or terminate the lease.

The Company has also elected not to reassess whether a contract is, or contains, a lease at the date of initial application. Instead, for contracts entered into before the transition date, the Company relied on its assessment made applying IAS 17 and IFRIC 4 Determining whether an Arrangement contains a Lease.

■ Other new standards and amendments to standards that are mandatory for the first time for the financial year beginning on or after January 1, 2019 had no material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

New accounting policies and disclosures effective in 2020 or later

The following new standards and amendments to standards have been issued, but are not mandatory for the first time for the financial year beginning January 1, 2019 and have been endorsed by the European Union.

■ Amendments to References to the Conceptual Framework in IFRS Standards (effective 1 January 2020). The revised Conceptual Framework includes a new chapter on measurement; guidance on reporting financial performance; improved definitions and guidance—in particular the definition of a liability; and clarifications in important areas, such as the roles of stewardship, prudence and measurement uncertainty in financial reporting.

These amendments are not expected to have any material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

The following new standards and amendments to standards have been issued, but are not mandatory for the first time for the financial year beginning January 1, 2019 and have not been endorsed by the European Union.

■ Amendments to IFRS 9, IAS 39 and IFRS 7: Interest Rate Benchmark Reform (effective 1 January 2020). The amendments require qualitative and quantitative disclosures to enable users of financial statements to understand how an entity’s hedging relationships are affected by the uncertainty arising from interest rate benchmark reform.

These amendments are not expected to have any material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

■ Amendments to the guidance of IFRS 3 Business Combinations, that revises the definition of a business (effective 1 January 2020). The new guidance provides a framework to evaluate when an input and a substantive process are present (including for early stage companies that have not generated outputs). To be a business without outputs, there will now need to be an organised workforce. The changes to the definition of a business will likely result in more acquisitions being accounted for as asset acquisitions across all industries, particularly real estate, pharmaceutical, and oil and gas. Application of the changes would also affect the accounting for disposal transactions.

These amendments are not expected to have any material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

■ Amendments to the definition of material in IAS 1 and IAS 8 (effective 1 January 2020). The amendments clarify the definition of material and make IFRSs more consistent. The amendment clarifies that the reference to obscuring information addresses situations in which the effect is similar to omitting or

F-21

Table of Contents

misstating that information. It also states that an entity assesses materiality in the context of the financial statements as a whole. The amendment also clarifies the meaning of ‘primary users of general purpose financial statements’ to whom those financial statements are directed, by defining them as ‘existing and potential investors, lenders and other creditors’ that must rely on general purpose financial statements for much of the financial information they need. The amendments are not expected to have a significant impact on the preparation of financial statements.

■ Amendments to IAS 1 regarding the classification of liabilities as current or non-current (effective 1 January 2022). The amendments affect only the presentation of liabilities in the statement of financial position, not the amount or timing of recognition of any asset, liability, income or expense, or the information that entities disclose about those items. The amendments clarify that the classification of liabilities as current or non-current should be based on rights that are in existence at the end of the reporting period and align the wording in all affected paragraphs to refer to the "right" to defer settlement by at least twelve months and make explicit that only rights in place "at the end of the reporting period" should affect the classification of a liability. They also clarify that classification is unaffected by expectations about whether an entity will exercise its right to defer settlement of a liability and they make clear that settlement refers to the transfer to the counterparty of cash, equity instruments, other assets or services. The amendments are not expected to have a significant impact on the preparation of financial statements.

These amendments are not expected to have any material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

■ IFRS 17 ‘Insurance contracts’ (effective 1 January 2022). This standard replaces IFRS 4, which currently permits a wide variety of practices in accounting for insurance contracts. IFRS 17 will fundamentally change the accounting by all entities that issue insurance contracts and investment contracts with discretionary participation features.

This standard is not expected to have any material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

2.23 Segment reporting

Segment results include revenue and expenses directly attributable to a segment and the relevant portion of revenue and expenses that can be allocated on a reasonable basis to a segment. Segment assets and liabilities comprise those operating assets and liabilities that are directly attributable to the segment or can be allocated to the segment on a reasonable basis. Segment assets and liabilities do not include income tax items. The Company manages its activities and operates as one business unit which is reflected in its organizational structure and internal reporting. The Company does not distinguish in its internal reporting different segments, neither business nor geographical segments. The chief operating decision‑maker is the Board of Directors.

3. Critical accounting judgements and key sources of estimation uncertainty

In the application of the Company’s accounting policies, which are described above, the Company is required to make judgments, estimates and assumptions about the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. The estimates and associated assumptions are based on historical experience and other factors that are considered to be relevant. Actual results may differ from these estimates.

The estimates and underlying assumptions are reviewed on an ongoing basis. Revisions to accounting estimates are recognized in the period in which the estimate is revised if the revision affects only that period or in the period of the revision and future periods if the revision affects both current and future periods.

F-22

Table of Contents

The following areas are areas where key assumptions concerning the future, and other key sources of estimation uncertainty at the end of the reporting period, have a significant risk of causing a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities within the next financial year.

Critical judgements in applying accounting policies

Revenue recognition

The Company recognized revenue of €21.6 million on the basis of costs incurred and deferred revenue of €289.0 million related to a global collaboration and license agreement entered into with Cilag GmbH International, an affiliate of Janssen as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019. The Company received $500 million as upfront payment for this collaboration and license agreement, consisting of $300 million upfront cash payment for the collaboration and license agreement and $200 million as equity investment in the Company.

The Company’s collaboration and license agreement has been determined as representing a single distinct performance obligation, due to the highly interdependent and interrelated nature of the development, manufacturing, and commercialization of the Licensed Compounds and Licensed Products. Fulfillment of the performance obligation occurs throughout the development, manufacturing, and commercialization phases of the Licensed Compounds and Licensed Products.

The Company recognizes the consideration received as deferred revenue and subsequently recognizes revenue over the contract term (“over time”) based on a research and development cost input model using a percentage of completion method, whereby actual research and development costs incurred as part of the Company’s performance obligation is compared to the total expected research and development costs needed to satisfy the performance obligation at measurement date.

Research and development cost accruals

The Company recognizes costs of €44.0 million, as specified in note 15 to the financial statements, incurred for clinical trial activities and manufacturing of drug products, as research and development expenses based on an evaluation of its vendors’ progress toward completion of specific tasks. Payment timing may differ significantly from the period in which the costs are recognized as expense, resulting in clinical trial accruals recognized within Trade and other payables in the statement of financial position.

Quantification of the research progress and the translation of the progress to these accruals requires judgment, because the progress is not directly observable. In estimating the vendors’ progress toward completion of specific tasks, the Company therefore uses data such as patient enrollment, clinical site activations and vendor information of actual costs incurred. This data is obtained through reports from or discussions with Company personnel and outside service providers as to the progress or state of completion of trials, or the completion of services. Costs are expensed over the service period the services are provided. Costs for services provided that have not yet been paid are recognized as accruals. Research and development cost accruals directly impact the revenue recognized, given the Company records revenue based on the percentage of completion method.

F-23

Table of Contents

4. Intangible assets

(in thousands of €) |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Opening balance as on January 1, 2017 |  | Intangibles acquired separately |  | Software licenses |  | Total
Cost |  | € | — |  | € | 93 |  | € | 93
Accumulated amortization |  |  | — |  |  | (76) |  |  | (76)
Book value at the beginning of the year |  |  | — |  |  | 17 |  |  | 17
Movements |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Additions |  |  | — |  |  | 6 |  |  | 6
Amortization |  |  | — |  |  | (10) |  |  | (10)
Balance as on December 31, 2017 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Cost |  |  | — |  |  | 99 |  |  | 99
Accumulated amortization |  |  | — |  |  | (86) |  |  | (86)
Book value at year end |  |  | — |  |  | 13 |  |  | 13
Movements |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Additions |  |  | — |  |  | 62 |  |  | 62
Cost of disposals |  |  | — |  |  | (2) |  |  | (2)
Amortization |  |  | — |  |  | (19) |  |  | (19)
Accumulated ammortization on disposals |  |  | — |  |  | 2 |  |  | 2
Balance as on December 31, 2018 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Cost |  |  | — |  |  | 159 |  |  | 159
Accumulated amortization |  |  | — |  |  | (103) |  |  | (103)
Book value at year end |  |  | — |  |  | 56 |  |  | 56
Movements |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Additions |  |  | 39,881 |  |  | 262 |  |  | 40,143
Amortization |  |  | — |  |  | (38) |  |  | (38)
Balance as on December 31, 2019 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Cost |  |  | 39,881 |  |  | 421 |  |  | 40,302
Accumulated amortization |  |  | — |  |  | (141) |  |  | (141)
Book value at year end |  | € | 39,881 |  | € | 280 |  | € | 40,161

Intangible assets related to software licenses are amortized over 3 years.

The intangibles assets held by the Company increased substantially as a result of the in-licensing of the ENHANZE® drug delivery technology from Halozyme. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company paid an upfront payment of $30 million, exercised the option to nominate an additional target (triggering a $10 million development milestone payment) and initiated a Phase 1 clinical trial using Halozyme's proprietary ENHANZE® drug delivery technology (triggering a $5 million development milestone payment). In line with its accounting policies, the Company has capitalized this upfront payment upon commencement of the in-license agreement. The development milestone payments have been capitalized when the development milestone was triggered.

The Company performed an annual impairment review on the intangible assets not yet available for use. This review did not result in the recognition of an impairment charge.

As of December 31, 2019, there are no commitments to acquire additional intangible assets, except as set forth in note 30. No intangible assets are pledged as security for liabilities nor are there any intangible assets whose title is restricted.

F-24

Table of Contents

5. Property, plant and equipment

|  | IT, office and lab |  | Right-of-use assets |  | Right-of-use assets |  | Leasehold |  | Lease |  |  |
(in thousands of €) |  | equipment |  | Buildings |  | Vehicles |  | improvements |  | equipment (1) |  | Total
Opening balance as on January 1, 2017 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Cost |  | € | 2,112 |  | € | — |  | € | — |  | € | — |  | € | — |  | € | 2,112
Accumulated depreciation |  |  | (1,346) |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | (1,346)
Book value at the beginning of the year |  |  | 766 |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 766
Movements |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Additions |  |  | 346 |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 346
Cost of disposals |  |  | (69) |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | (69)
Depreciation |  |  | (425) |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | (425)
Accumulated depreciation on disposals |  |  | 58 |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 58
Closing balance as on December 31, 2017 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Cost |  |  | 2,389 |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 2,389
Accumulated depreciation |  |  | (1,713) |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | (1,713)
Book value at year end |  |  | 676 |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 676
Movements |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Additions |  |  | 370 |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 253 |  |  | 623
Cost of disposals |  |  | (47) |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  |  |  |  | (46)
Depreciation |  |  | (463) |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | (11) |  |  | (474)
Accumulated depreciation on disposals |  |  | 46 |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  |  |  |  | 46
Closing balance as on December 31, 2018 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Cost |  |  | 2,712 |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 253 |  |  | 2,965
Accumulated depreciation |  |  | (2,130) |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | (11) |  |  | (2,141)
Book value at year end |  | € | 582 |  | € | — |  | € | — |  | € | — |  | € | 242 |  | € | 824
Adoption of IFRS 16 on January 1, 2019 |  | € | — |  | € | 2,338 |  | € | 452 |  |  | — |  | € | — |  | € | 2,790
Movements |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Additions |  |  | 765 |  |  | 4,553 |  |  | 525 |  |  | 808 |  |  | 29 |  |  | 6,680
Depreciation |  |  | (460) |  |  | (1,315) |  |  | (233) |  |  | (92) |  |  | (28) |  |  | (2,128)
Closing balance as on December 31, 2019 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Cost |  |  | 3,477 |  |  | 6,891 |  |  | 977 |  |  | 808 |  |  | 282 |  |  | 12,435
Accumulated depreciation |  |  | (2,590) |  |  | (1,315) |  |  | (233) |  |  | (92) |  |  | (39) |  |  | (4,269)
Book value at year end |  | € | 887 |  | € | 5,576 |  | € | 744 |  | € | 716 |  | € | 243 |  | € | 8,167

There are no commitments to acquire property, plant and equipment. Furthermore, no items of property, plant and equipment are pledged. See note 23 for information for leases where the Company is a lessee.

(1) The Company has elected not to reassess whether a contract is, or contains, a lease at the date of initial application. Instead, for contracts entered into before the transition date, the Company relied on its assessment made applying IAS 17 and IFRIC 4 Determining whether an Arrangement contains a Lease.

F-25

Table of Contents

6. Financial assets — non-current

In March 2019, the Company entered into a license agreement with AgomAb Therapeutics NV for the use of HGF-mimetic SIMPLE Antibodies™, developed under the Company’s Innovative Access Program. In exchange for granting this license, the Company received a profit share in AgomAb Therapeutics NV. The Company assessed the accounting treatment and concluded that the license agreement is in scope of IFRS 15 and that any revenue should be recognized at once at the effective date of the agreement. The profit share has been designated as a non-current financial asset held at fair value through profit or loss.

In March 2019, AgomAb Therapeutics NV secured €21.0 million in a Series A financing round. The Company used the post-money valuation of this Series A financing round and the number of outstanding shares in determining the initial fair value of the profit sharing instrument. In October 2019, a subsequent subscription to the Series A financing round increased the number of outstanding shares. The Company re-assessed the fair value of the profit sharing instrument, which resulted in a fair value gain on financial assets at fair value through profit or loss of €1.1 million.

7. Research and development incentive receivables

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Research and development incentive receivables—current |  | € | 261 |  | € | 301 |  | € | 158
Research and development incentive receivables—non-current |  |  | 8,566 |  |  | 4,883 |  |  | 3,033
|  | € | 8,827 |  | € | 5,184 |  | € | 3,191

On December 31, 2019, the Company has recorded a tax receivable of €8.8 million, compared to €5.2 million on December 31, 2018, in relation to a research and development incentive tax scheme in Belgium under which the research and development incentives can be refunded after five years if not offset against future income tax expense. The research and development incentives are recorded in other operating income (see note 18) in the consolidated statement of profit and loss and other comprehensive income. These amounts are expected to be gradually reimbursed in cash as from 2020 onwards.

8. Restricted cash

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Non‑current restricted cash |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Rental guarantees |  | € | 630 |  | € | 251 |  | € | 256
Total non‑current |  | € | 630 |  | € | 251 |  | € | 256
Current restricted cash |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Escrow account < 1 year |  |  | — |  |  | 1,692 |  |  | 1,692
Total restricted cash |  | € | 630 |  | € | 1,943 |  | € | 1,948

On December 31, 2019, the Company had a total amount of €0.6 million of restricted cash:

| · |  | A non‑current part for an amount of €0.6 million mainly relating to a deposit guarantee paid under the lease agreement for the laboratory and offices of the Company.

| · |  | The current part of restricted cash related to an escrow account opened under an agreement with a third party involved in the collaboration with AbbVie. In 2019, this escrow account has been partially released to the Company and partially to the third party, as the work plan of the related collaboration agreement with AbbVie has been almost completed.

F-26

Table of Contents

9. Trade and other receivables

The trade and other receivables are composed of receivables which are detailed below:

|  |  | Year Ended
|  |  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
VAT receivable |  | € | 1,121 |  | € | 496 |  | € | 317
Trade receivables |  |  | 22,580 |  |  | 214 |  |  | 845
Other receivables |  |  | 1,378 |  |  | 455 |  |  | 750
Interest receivable |  |  | 2,081 |  |  | 556 |  |  | —
VLAIO grant receivable |  |  | 955 |  |  | 1,165 |  |  | 930
|  | € | 28,115 |  | € | 2,886 |  | € | 2,842

The nominal amounts of all trade and other receivables approximate their respective fair values. The VAT receivable relates to VAT amounts to be recovered in the first quarter of 2020.

Trade receivables correspond to amounts invoiced to the collaborators or strategic allies of the Company. On December 31, 2019, an amount of €0.1 million was due for more than 30 days, but still considered to be collectable. The Company applied the IFRS 9 simplified approach to measure expected credit losses, which uses a lifetime expected loss allowance for all receivables. To measure the expected credit losses, receivables have been grouped based on credit risk characteristics and the days past due. The provision for expected credit losses was not significant given that there have been no credit losses over the last three years and the high quality nature of our customers. As a result, no bad debt allowance was recorded nor were any trade receivables impaired on December 31, 2019 and December 31, 2018.

The Flanders Innovation and Entrepreneurship Agency grant to receive consists of earned income from government grants for which no payments have been received but for which the relating expenditures have been incurred. For more information on the Flanders Innovation and Entrepreneurship Agency grants to receive, see note 18.

10. Financial assets — current

On December 31, 2019, the current financial assets amounted to €1,004.5 million compared to €283.5 million on December 31, 2018. These current financial assets relate to:

| · |  | Financial instruments in the form of money market funds with a recommended investment horizon of 6 months. These funds are highly liquid investments and can be readily converted into a known amount of cash, but because of their historical volatility these funds cannot be classified as cash and cash equivalents. Values recognized on the balance sheet are the fair values, with changes in fair value going through profit and loss.

| · |  | USD term accounts with a maturity of six months.

Please also refer to note 27 for more information on the financial instruments.

11. Cash and cash equivalents

|  |  | Year Ended
|  |  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Cash equivalents |  | € | 252,550 |  | € | 217,626 |  | € | 25,000
Cash and bank balances |  |  | 78,732 |  |  | 63,414 |  |  | 165,867
|  | € | 331,282 |  | € | 281,040 |  | € | 190,867

On December 31, 2019, cash and cash equivalents amounted to €331.3 million compared to €281.0 million on December 31, 2018 and included cash equivalents and cash and bank balances held in different banks. Cash

F-27

Table of Contents

positions are invested with preferred financial partners, which are mostly considered to be high quality financial institutions with sound credit ratings.

Policies are in place that limit the amount of credit exposure to any one financial institution (see also note 27).

12. Share capital and share premium

Roll forward of number of shares outstanding:

Number of shares outstanding on January 1, 2017 |  | 20,126,479
U.S. initial public offering on Nasdaq on May 17, 2017 |  | 5,865,000
Over-allotment option exercised by underwriters on May 19, 2017 |  | 879,750
Exercise of options in August 2017 |  | 5,000
Exercise of options in September 2017 |  | 15,000
Exercise of options in October 2017 |  | 1,400
Exercise of options in November 2017 |  | 106,782
U.S. second public offering on Nasdaq on December 13, 2017 |  | 4,440,000
Over-allotment option exercised by underwriters on December 14, 2017 |  | 666,000
Exercise of options in December 2017 |  | 75,230
Number of shares outstanding on December 31, 2017 |  | 32,180,641
Exercise of options in January 2018 |  | 111,727
Exercise of options in March 2018 |  | 113,075
Exercise of options in April 2018 |  | 34,039
Exercise of options in May 2018 |  | 5,900
Exercise of options in June 2018 |  | 5,393
Exercise of options in July 2018 |  | 469
Exercise of options in August 2018 |  | 2,300
Exercise of options in September 2018 |  | 5,913
U.S. third public offering on Nasdaq on September 18, 2018 |  | 3,475,000
Exercise of options in October 2018 |  | 556
Exercise of options in November 2018 |  | 9,768
Exercise of options in December 2018 |  | 30,531
Number of shares outstanding on December 31,2018 |  | 35,975,312
Exercise of options in January 2019 |  | 163,170
Share subscription from Johnson & Johnson Innovation Inc. |  | 1,766,899
Exercise of options in February 2019 |  | 13,393
Exercise of options in March 2019 |  | 73,005
Exercise of options in April 2019 |  | 13,729
Exercise of options in May 2019 |  | 35,054
Exercise of options in June 2019 |  | 66,965
Exercise of options in July 2019 |  | 56
Exercise of options in August 2019 |  | 8,710
Exercise of options in September 2019 |  | 5,730
Exercise of options in October 2019 |  | 611
Global public offering on Euronext and Nasdaq on November 7, 2019 |  | 4,000,000
Over-allotment option exercised by underwriters on November 8, 2019 |  | 600,000
Exercise of options in November 2019 |  | 16,714
Exercise of options in December 2019 |  | 22,180
Number of shares outstanding on December 31,2019 |  | 42,761,528

New shares issued during 2017

On May 17, 2017, argenx SE offered 5,865,000 of its ordinary shares through an initial public offering in the United States in the form of ADSs at a price to the public of $17.00 per ADS, before underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses. On May 19, 2017, the underwriters of the offering exercised their over-

F-28

Table of Contents

allotment option to purchase 879,750 additional ADSs in full. As a result, argenx SE received €102.1 million of total gross proceeds from the offering, decreased by €9.6 million of underwriter discounts and commissions, and offering expenses, of which €8.9 million has been deducted from equity. The total net cash proceeds from this offering amounted to €92.5 million.

On December 14, 2017, argenx SE offered 4,440,000 of its ordinary shares through a public offering in the United States in the form of ADSs at a price to the public of $52.00 per ADS, before underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses. On December 15, 2017, the underwriters of the offering exercised their over-allotment option to purchase 666,000 additional ADSs in full. As a result, argenx SE received €225.6 million of gross proceeds from this offering, decreased by €14.3 million of underwriter discounts and commissions, and offering expenses, of which €14.1 million has been deducted from equity. The total net cash proceeds from the Offering amounted to €211.3 million.

For both offerings completed in 2017, the ADSs are evidenced by American Depositary Receipts (ADRs), and each ADS represents the right to receive one ordinary share. These ADSs are listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “ARGX”.

203,412 new shares were also issued in 2017 as a result of the exercise of stock options under the argenx Employee Stock Option Plan.

These issuances of shares resulted in a total of 32,180,641 ordinary shares with a nominal value of €0.1 per share on December 31, 2017. The extraordinary general meeting of the Company of November 7, 2017 had authorized the board of directors to issue up to a maximum of 20% of the then outstanding share capital for a period of 18 months, or up to a capital increase of €537,852.60 represented by 5,378,526 shares. The board of directors has issued 5,106,000 shares on the occasion of the U.S. public offering in December 2017 and as of December 31, 2017, the existing authorization allowed the issuance of up to 272,526 shares.

New shares issued during 2018

On September 18, 2018, argenx SE offered 3,475,000 of its ordinary shares through a public offering in the United States in the form of ADSs at a price to the public of $86.50 per ADS, before underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses. As a result, argenx SE received €255.7 million of gross proceeds from this offering, decreased by €14.8 million of underwriter discounts and commissions, and offering expenses, of which €14.7 million has been deducted from equity. The total net cash proceeds from the offering amounted to €240.9 million.

As a result of the exercise of options under the argenx Employee Stock Option Plan, 319,671 new shares were created in 2018.

These issuances of shares resulted in a total of 35,975,312 ordinary shares, with a nominal value of €0.1 per share, on December 31, 2018. The annual general meeting of the Company on May 8, 2018 had authorized the board of directors to issue up to a maximum of 20% of the then outstanding share capital for a period of 18 months, or up to a capital increase of €648,790 represented by 6,487,896 shares. The board of directors has issued 3,475,000 shares on the occasion of the follow-on U.S. public offering in September 2018, and as of December 31, 2018, the existing authorization allowed the issuance of up to 3,012,896 shares.

New shares issued during 2019

1,766,899 new shares were issued to Johnson & Johnson Innovation Inc., following the closing of the exclusive, global collaboration and license agreement for cusatuzumab (ARGX-110) with Cilag GmbH International, an affiliate of the Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson. The Company concluded that the share premium that Janssen paid above the closing price on the day of entering into the investment agreement (equal to an amount of €24.9 million) was paid because of the existing obligations to deliver development services under the terms of the collaboration agreement, and is therefore to be allocated to the single performance obligation (see also note 17).

On November 7, 2019, argenx SE offered 4,000,000 of its ordinary shares through a global offering which consisted of (i) a public offering of 1,410,057 ADSs in the U.S. and certain other countries outside the European

F-29

Table of Contents

Economic Area (EEA) at a price of $121.00 per ADS, before underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses; and (ii) a concurrent private placement of 2,589,943 of ordinary shares in the EEA at an offering price of €109.18 per share, before underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses. On November 8, 2019, the underwriters of the offering exercised their over-allotment option to purchase 600,000 additional ADSs in full. As a result, argenx SE received €502.2 million of gross proceeds from this offering, decreased by €23.2 million of underwriter discounts and commissions, and offering expenses, of which €23.0 million has been deducted from equity. The total net cash proceeds from the offering amounted to €479.0 million.

As a result of the exercise of options under the argenx Employee Stock Option Plan, 419,317 new shares were created in 2019.

These issuances of shares resulted in a total of 42,761,528 ordinary shares, with a nominal value of €0.1 per share, on December 31, 2019. The annual general meeting of the Company on May 9, 2019 had authorized the board of directors to issue up to a maximum of 20% of the then outstanding share capital for a period of 18 months, or up to a capital increase of €760,110 represented by 7,601,101 shares. The board of directors has issued 4,600,000 shares on the occasion of the follow-on global offering in November 2019, and as of December 31, 2019, the existing authorization allows the issuance of up to 3,001,101 shares.

13. Share-based payments

The Company has a stock options scheme for the employees of the Company and its subsidiaries. In accordance with the terms of the plan, as approved by shareholders, employees may be granted options to purchase ordinary shares at an exercise price as mentioned below per ordinary share.

The Company has granted on June 28, 2019 a total of 423,487 stock options, on November 1, 2019 a total of 19,800 stock options and on December 20, 2019 a total of 921,885 stock options to its employees, Board members and consultants. The total number of stock options outstanding on December 31, 2019 totaled 4,358,069 compared to 3,536,651 on December 31, 2018 and 2,862,216 on December 31, 2017. No stock options were expired in the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017. 419,317 stock options have been exercised in the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to 319,671 in the year ended December 31, 2018 and 203,412 in the year ended December 31, 2017. A total of 124,437 stock options have been forfeited in the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to 46,369 in the year ended December 31, 2018 and 2,369 in the year ended December 31, 2017.

The stock options are granted to employees, consultants or directors of the Company and its subsidiaries. The stock options have been granted free of charge. Each employee’s stock option converts into one ordinary share of the Company upon exercise. No amounts are paid or payable by the recipient on receipt of the option. The options carry neither rights to dividends nor voting rights. Options may be exercised at any time from the date of vesting to the date of their expiry.

The stock options granted vest, in principle, as follows:

| · |  | 1/3rd of the stock options granted will vest on the first anniversary of the granting of the stock options, and

| · |  | 1/24th of the remaining 2/3rd of the stock options granted will vest on the last day of each of the 24 months following the month of the first anniversary of the granting of the stock options.

On November 25, 2019, at the extraordinary general meeting, the shareholders of the Company approved the amended stock option plan. The amended stock option plan authorizes the Board to also grant sign-on stock options, which vest as follows:

| · |  | 1/4th of the stock options granted will vest on the first anniversary of the granting of the stock options, and

| · |  | 1/36th of the remaining 3/4th of the stock options granted will vest on the last day of each of the 36 months following the month of the first anniversary of the granting of the stock options.

No other conditions are attached to the stock options.

F-30

Table of Contents

The following share-based payment arrangements were in existence during the current and prior years and which are exercisable at the end of each period presented:

|  | Exercise price |  | Outstanding
|  | per stock |  | stock options on
|  | options |  | December 31,
Expiry date |  | (in €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
2020 |  | € | 3.95 |  | 7,210 |  | 18,200 |  | 36,960
2021 |  |  | 3.95 |  | — |  | — |  | 2,850
2023 |  |  | 2.44 |  | 211,769 |  | 294,400 |  | 314,593
2024 |  |  | 2.44 |  | 96,696 |  | 117,733 |  | 135,890
2024 |  |  | 3.95 |  | 6,238 |  | 6,895 |  | 15,692
2024 |  |  | 7.17 |  | 335,067 |  | 407,061 |  | 516,100
2024 |  |  | 2.44 |  | 6,000 |  | 26,970 |  | 83,820
2025 |  |  | 11.44 |  | 39,000 |  | 39,000 |  | 39,000
2025 |  |  | 10.34 |  | 3,000 |  | 3,000 |  | 3,000
2025 |  |  | 9.47 |  | 185,832 |  | 226,323 |  | 235,514
2026 |  |  | 11.38 |  | 45,000 |  | 50,415 |  | 60,000
2026 |  |  | 11.47 |  | 219,791 |  | 257,616 |  | 282,310
2026 |  |  | 14.13 |  | 258,746 |  | 315,102 |  | 362,126
2027 |  |  | 18.41 |  | 108,613 |  | 114,019 |  | 120,536
2027 |  |  | 21.17 |  | 565,798 |  | 628,292 |  | 653,825
2023 |  |  | 80.82 |  | 94,100 |  | 94,600 |  | —
2028 |  |  | 80.82 |  | 73,100 |  | 75,450 |  | —
2023 |  |  | 86.32 |  | 366,260 |  | 369,760 |  | —
2028 |  |  | 86.32 |  | 402,714 |  | 491,815 |  | —
2024 |  |  | 113.49 |  | 111,690 |  | — |  | —
2029 |  |  | 113.49 |  | 279,760 |  | — |  | —
2029 |  |  | 113.49 |  | 19,800 |  |  |  |
2024/2029 (1) |  | € | 135.75 |  | 921,885 |  | — |  | —
|  |  |  |  | 4,358,069 |  | 3,536,651 |  | 2,862,216

| (1) |  | On December 20, 2019, the Company granted options for which the beneficiaries had a 60-day period to choose between a contractual term of five or ten years.

|  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
|  | Number of |  | Weighted average |  | Number of |  | Weighted average |  | Number of |  | Weighted average
|  | stock options |  | exercise price |  | stock options |  | exercise price |  | stock options |  | exercise price
Outstanding at January 1 |  | 3,536,651 |  | € | 33.42 |  | 2,862,216 |  | € | 11.54 |  | 2,293,636 |  | € | 7.72
Granted |  | 1,365,172 |  |  | 128.52 |  | 1,040,475 |  |  | 85.37 |  | 774,361 |  |  | 20.74
Exercised |  | (419,317) |  |  | 11.35 |  | (319,671) |  |  | 7.02 |  | (203,412) |  |  | 3.46
Forfeited |  | (124,437) |  |  | 88.92 |  | (46,369) |  |  | 30.44 |  | (2,369) |  |  | 12.52
Outstanding at December 31, |  | 4,358,069 |  |  | 63.75 |  | 3,536,651 |  |  | 33.42 |  | 2,862,216 |  |  | 11.54
Exercisable at December 31, |  | 2,203,476 |  | € | 22.59 |  | 1,859,315 |  | € | 9.62 |  | 1,598,829 |  | € | 6.80

The weighted average share price at the date of exercise of options exercised during the year ended December 31, 2019 was €110.99, compared to €66.93 during the year ended December 31, 2018 and €23.53 during the year ended December 31, 2017. The weighted average remaining contractual life of the stock options outstanding amounted to 7.27 years on December 31, 2019 compared to 7.82 years on December 31, 2018 and 8.03

F-31

Table of Contents

years on December 31, 2017. The table below shows the weighted average remaining contractual life for each range of exercise price:

|  |  |  | Weighted average
|  |  |  | remaining
|  | Outstanding on |  | contractual life
Exercise price (in €) |  | December 31, 2019 |  | (in years)
2.44-3.95 |  | 327,913 |  | 3.95
7.17-9.47 |  | 520,899 |  | 5.32
10.34-14.13 |  | 565,537 |  | 6.59
18.41-21.17 |  | 674,411 |  | 7.88
80.82-86.32 |  | 936,174 |  | 6.43
113.49-135.75 |  | 1,333,135 |  | 9.41

The fair market value of the stock options has been determined based on the Black and Scholes model using the following assumptions:

| · |  | The expected volatility corresponds to the calculated annual volatility of our shares since our initial public offering on Euronext Brussels on July 10, 2014 until the date of grant of the options.

| · |  | The average expected option life is determined as a weighted average of the time from grant date to date of becoming exercisable and from grant date to expiry of the warrants.

| · |  | Risk free interest rate equals the Belgium 10Year Bond Yield at the date of grant.

| · |  | Expected dividends is considered 0% as we have no plan for distributing dividends and have no history of distributing dividends to shareholders.

Below is an overview of the parameters used in relation to the determination of the fair value of the grants during 2019:

Stock options granted in |  | June 2019 |  | Nov 2019 |  | Dec 2019 |
Number of options granted |  |  | 423,487 |  |  | 19,800 |  |  | 921,885 |
Average fair value of options (in EUR) |  | € | 63.45 |  | € | 57.69 |  | € | 65.72 |
Share price (in EUR) |  | € | 123.20 |  | € | 126.40 |  | € | 146.40 |
Exercise price (in EUR) |  | € | 113.49 |  | € | 113.49 |  | € | 135.75 |
Expected volatility |  |  | 45.25 | % |  | 44.14 | % |  | 44.18 | %
Average expected option life (in years) |  |  | 8.59 |  |  | 6.50 |  |  | 6.50 | (1)
Risk‑free interest rate |  |  | 0.07 | % |  | (0.05) | % |  | 0.03 | %
Expected dividends |  |  | — | % |  | — | % |  | — | %

| (1) |  | On December 20, 2019, the Company granted a total of 921,885 stock options. The beneficiary can choose between a contractual term of five or ten years. The average expected option life is currently estimated at six and a half years. This estimate will be reassessed once the acceptance period of 60 days has passed and the beneficiaries will have made a choice between a contractual term of five or ten years. The total fair value of the grant would range from €49.5 million (100% of the stock options at an expected option life of four years) to €60.6 million (100% of the stock options at an expected option life of six and a half years).

F-32

Table of Contents

Below is an overview of the parameters used in relation to the determination of the fair value of grants during 2018:

Stock options granted in |  | June 2018 |  | Dec 2018 |
Number of options granted |  |  | 178,900 |  |  | 861,575 |
Average fair value of options (in EUR) |  | € | 32.12 |  | € | 39.85 |
Share price (in EUR) |  | € | 72.00 |  | € | 82.20 |
Exercise price (in EUR) |  | € | 80.82 |  | € | 86.32 |
Expected volatility |  |  | 45.50 | % |  | 46.19 | %
Average expected option life (in years) |  |  | 7.36 |  |  | 7.83 |
Risk‑free interest rate |  |  | 0.72 | % |  | 0.77 | %
Expected dividends |  |  | — | % |  | — | %

Below in an overview of the parameter used in relation to the determination of the fair value of grants during 2017:

Stock options granted in |  | June 2017 |  | Dec 2017 |
Number of options granted |  |  | 120,536 |  |  | 653,825 |
Average fair value of options (in EUR) |  | € | 7.90 |  | € | 37.10 |
Share price (in EUR) |  | € | 17.76 |  | € | 53.50 |
Exercise price (in EUR) |  | € | 18.41 |  | € | 21.17 |
Expected volatility |  |  | 36.6 | % |  | 36.1 | %
Average expected option life (in years) |  |  | 10 |  |  | 10 |
Risk‑free interest rate |  |  | 0.61 | % |  | 0.53 | %
Expected dividends |  |  | — | % |  | — | %

The total share-based payment expense recognized in the consolidated statement of comprehensive income totaled €39.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to €19.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2018 and €4.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2017.

14. Provisions for employee benefits

Our personnel in Belgium participated in a defined contribution plan (extra-legal pension). The Belgian defined contribution pension plans were by law subject to minimum guaranteed rates of return, 3.25% on employer contributions and 3.75% on employee contributions. These rates, which apply as an average over the entire career, may be modified by Royal Decree. Therefore, those plans were basically accounted for as defined contribution plans.

As a consequence of the law of December 18, 2015, minimum returns were guaranteed by the employer as follows: (a) for the contributions paid as from January 1, 2016, a new variable minimum return based on OLO rates, with a minimum of 1.75% and a maximum of 3.75%. In review of the low rates of the OLO in the last years, the return has been initially set to 1.75%; (b) for the contributions paid until end of December 2015, the previously applied legal returns as mentioned above, continue to apply until the leaving of the employees.

In view of the minimum returns guarantees, the Belgian defined contribution plans classify as defined benefit plans as from end December 2015.

The amounts recognized in the balance sheet are as follows:

(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Defined benefit obligation |  | € | 1,789 |  | € | 1,277 |  | € | 1,007
Fair value of plan assets |  |  | 1,725 |  |  | 1,270 |  |  | 982
Deficit / surplus (−) of funded obligations |  |  | 64 |  |  | 7 |  |  | 25
Net liability (asset) |  | € | 64 |  | € | 7 |  | € | 25

F-33

Table of Contents

The movement in the defined benefit obligation, plan assets, net liability and asset over the year is as follows:

(in thousands of €) |  |  | 2019 |  |  | 2018 |  |  | 2017
Defined benefit obligation at January 1 |  | € | 1,277 |  | € | 1,007 |  | € | 670
Service cost |  |  | 379 |  |  | 336 |  |  | 352
Interest expense |  |  | 19 |  |  | 15 |  |  | 11
Contributions by plan participants |  |  | (167) |  |  | (116) |  |  | (148)
Actuarial gains (-) / losses (+) |  |  | 281 |  |  | 35 |  |  | 124
Benefits paid / transfers out |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | (2)
Defined benefit obligation at December 31 |  | € | 1,789 |  | € | 1,277 |  | € | 1,007
(in thousands of €) |  |  | 2019 |  |  | 2018 |  |  | 2017
Fair value of plan assets at January 1 |  | € | 1,270 |  | € | 982 |  | € | 669
Interest income |  |  | 19 |  |  | 16 |  |  | 10
Administrative costs & taxes |  |  | (47) |  |  | (32) |  |  | (46)
Contributions by company & participants |  |  | 475 |  |  | 328 |  |  | 423
Contributions by plan participants |  |  | (168) |  |  | (116) |  |  | (148)
Actuarial gains (+) / losses (-) |  |  | 176 |  |  | 92 |  |  | 76
Benefits paid / transfers out |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | (2)
Fair value of plan assets at December 31 |  | € | 1,725 |  | € | 1,270 |  | € | 982

In the income statement, current service cost and interest expense or income are included in the operating loss.

The Company’s estimated employer contributions for 2019 amount to €0.3 million compared to €0.2 million in 2018 and €0.3 million in 2017. Plan assets on December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 consisted fully of insurance contracts and did not include direct positions in the Company’s shares or bonds, nor do they include any property used by the Company.

The principal actuarial assumption on the balance sheet date (weighted averages based on outstanding defined benefit obligation) was:

Actuarial assumption |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Discount rate |  | 1.0 | % |  | 1.3 | % |  | 1.3 | %

The weighted average duration of the benefit obligations equals 19.32 years. Sensitivity analyses show the following effects:

Sensitivity analysis |  | Change in |  | Impact on defined‑ |  |  |
(in thousands of €) |  | assumption |  | benefit obligation |  | % |
Discount rate |  | -0.25 | % | Increase by |  | 45.5 |  | 2.54 | %
Discount rate |  | 0.25 | % | Decrease by |  | (33.7) |  | 1.88 | %

F-34

Table of Contents

The above analyses were done on a mutually exclusive basis, and holding all other assumptions constant. Through its defined benefit plan, the Company is exposed to a number of risks, the most significant of which are detailed below:

Asset volatility | The plan liabilities are calculated using a discount rate set with reference to corporate bond yields; if plan assets underperform this yield, this will create a deficit.
Changes in bond yields | A decrease in corporate bond yields will increase plan liabilities, although this will be partially offset by an increase in the value of the plan’s bond holdings.
Salary risk | The majority of the plan’s benefit obligations are calculated by reference to the future salaries of plan members. As such, a salary increase of plan members higher than expected will lead to higher liabilities.
Longevity risk | Belgian pension plans provide for lump sum payments upon retirement. As such there is limited or no longevity risk.

The weighted average age of the plan participants equals 46.2 years on December 31, 2019, compared to 43.8 years on December 31, 2018 and 46 years on December 31, 2017.

15. Trade and other payables

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Trade payables |  | € | 9,360 |  | € | 6,007 |  | € | 4,395
Accruals for invoices to be received |  |  | 49,069 |  |  | 18,145 |  |  | 4,046
Short‑term employee benefits |  |  | 26,872 |  |  | 12,920 |  |  | 6,844
|  | € | 85,301 |  | € | 37,072 |  | € | 15,285

Trade payables correspond primarily to clinical and manufacturing activities. The fair value of trade payables approximates their carrying amount.

The accruals for invoices to be received amount to €49.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, of which €44.0 million relate to invoices to be received from clinical manufacturing organizations for the manufacturing of drug products and from clinical research organizations.

Short‑term employee benefits include payables and accruals for salaries and bonuses to be paid to the employees of the Company.

16. Tax liabilities

The current tax liability amounts to €0.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019 and corresponds primarily to the tax payable on the result of argenx US, Inc. in view of the transfer price agreements set up between argenx BV and argenx US, Inc.

As part of its business restructuring, the Company transferred the legal ownership of its intellectual property rights from the Dutch argenx SE to its wholly owned Belgian subsidiary, argenx BV effective as of January 1, 2017, for an amount of €79.9 million. In 2019, the Company has obtained a tax ruling in Belgium which allows for a treatment of the aforementioned amount as a tax deductible cost in the Belgian subsidiary.

F-35

Table of Contents

17. Revenue

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Upfront payments |  | € | 22,360 |  | € | 8,635 |  | € | 20,137
Milestone payments |  |  | 28,085 |  |  | 11,440 |  |  | 9,677
Research and development service fees |  |  | 19,338 |  |  | 1,407 |  |  | 6,601
|  | € | 69,783 |  | € | 21,482 |  | € | 36,415

For the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, the majority of the revenue was generated under the agreements with Janssen and AbbVie, each as described below. These agreements comprise elements of upfront payments, milestone payments based on development criteria and research and development fees.

For the year ended December 31, 2019, €27.3 million related to the collaboration and license agreement with AbbVie was recognized in revenue on the basis of costs incurred for this program. Revenue recognized consisted of (i) €0.8 million related to the upfront payment received, (ii) €0.4 million related to development milestone payments received in previous years and (iii) €26.1 million related to a milestone achieved in 2019. The outstanding balance of deferred revenue amounts to €1.4 million of which €1.2 million is recognized as deferred revenue — current and €0.2 million as deferred revenue — non-current.

For the year ended December 31, 2019, €21.6 million related to the collaboration and license agreement with Janssen was recognized in revenue on the basis of costs incurred for this program. Revenue recognized consisted of (i) €18.3 million related to the upfront payment received, (ii) €1.7 million related to the revenue recognition of deferred income triggered by the accounting treatment of the share subscription agreement at the time of signing of the agreement in December 2018 and (iii) €1.6 million related to a milestone achieved in 2019. The outstanding balance of deferred revenue amounts to €289.0 million of which €71.1 million is recognized as deferred revenue — current and €217.9 million as deferred revenue — non-current.

In total, the Company recognized €1.2 million of revenue that was included in the deferred revenue balance at the beginning of the year. As of December 31, 2019, the unsatisfied performance obligations resulting from out-licensing agreements amounted to €290.4 million (compared to €2.2 million as of December 31, 2018). Management expects that 25% of the transaction price allocated to the unsatisfied performance obligations will be recognized as revenue during the next reporting period. The remaining 75% will be recognized in financial years 2021 until 2027. The amount disclosed above does not include variable consideration which is constrained.

Research and development service fees increased by €17.9 million to €19.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019 due to the research and development service fees recognized under the Janssen collaboration and license agreement.

Below are summaries of the key collaborations.

AbbVie

In April 2016, the Company entered into a collaboration agreement with AbbVie S.À.R.L. (AbbVie) to develop and commercialize ARGX-115 (ABBV-151). Under the terms of the collaboration agreement, the Company was responsible for conducting and funding all ARGX‑115 (ABBV-151) research and development activities up to completion of IND enabling studies.

The Company granted AbbVie an exclusive option, for a specified period following completion of IND enabling studies, to obtain a worldwide, exclusive license to the ARGX‑115 (ABBV-151) program to develop and commercialize products. The Company received an upfront, nonrefundable, non-creditable payment of $40 million (€35.1 million as of the date the payment was received) from AbbVie for the exclusive option to license ARGX‑115 (ABBV-151). The Company achieved two preclinical milestones, each of which triggered a $10.0 million payment (€8.9 million based on the exchange rate in effect as of the date the first milestone payment was received, and €8.7 million based on the exchange rate in effect as of the date the second milestone payment was received).

F-36

Table of Contents

In August 2018, AbbVie exercised its option and has assumed certain development obligations, being solely responsible for all research, development and regulatory costs relating to ARGX-115 based products. In March 2019, the Company achieved the first development milestone upon initiation of a first-in-human clinical trial, triggering a $30.0 million payment. Subject to the continuing progress of ARGX-115 (ABBV-151) by AbbVie, the Company is eligible to receive development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments in aggregate amounts of up to $110 million, $190 million and $325 million, respectively, as well as tiered royalties on sales at percentages ranging from the mid‑single digits to the lower teens, subject to customary reductions.

The Company has the right, on a product‑by‑product basis to co‑promote ARGX‑115 (ABBV-151) based products in the European Economic Area and Switzerland and to combine the product with the Company’s own future immuno‑oncology programs. The co‑promotion effort would be governed by a co‑promotion agreement negotiated in good faith by the parties. AbbVie will fund further GARP‑related research by the Company for an initial period of two years. AbbVie will have the right to license additional therapeutic programs emerging from this research, for which the Company could receive associated milestone and royalty payments.

With regard to its collaboration with AbbVie, the Company concluded as follows:

| · |  | There is one single performance obligation under IFRS 15, that being the transfer of a license combined with performance of research and development activities. The Company concluded that the license is not distinct in the context of the contract.

| · |  | The transaction price of these two agreements is currently composed of a fixed part, that being an upfront license fee, and a variable part, that being milestone payments and cost reimbursements of research and development activities delivered. Milestone payments are only included in the transaction price as from the moment the achievement of the related milestone event is highly probable (usually at the time of achievement of the milestone event). Sales-based milestones and sales-based royalties are a part of the Company’s arrangements but are not yet included in its revenues, as its programs with AbbVie is still in the development phase.

| · |  | The transaction price has been allocated to the single performance obligation, and revenues have been recognized over the estimated service period based on a pattern that reflects the transfer of the license and progress to complete satisfaction of the research and development activities. This is because the transfer of the license is considered to be combined with the performance of research and development activities. Therefore, research and development milestone payments are variable considerations that are entirely allocated to the single performance obligation.

| · |  | The Company has chosen an input model to measure the satisfaction of the single performance obligation that considers percentage of costs incurred for these programs (percentage of completion method).

| · |  | Cost reimbursements received could be recognized in revenues when costs are incurred and agreed by the parties, as the Company is acting as a principal in the scope of its stake of the research and development activities of its ongoing license and collaboration agreements.

Janssen

In December 2018, the Company entered into a collaboration agreement with Cilag GmbH International, an affiliate of Janssen, to jointly develop and commercialize cusatuzumab. The Company has granted Janssen a license to the cusatuzumab program to develop, manufacture and commercialize products. For the U.S., the granted commercialization license is co-exclusive with argenx, while outside the U.S., the granted license is exclusive. Janssen and argenx will assume certain development obligations, and will be jointly responsible for all research, development and regulatory costs relating to the products. argenx will be eligible to receive potentially up to $1.3 billion in development, regulatory and sales milestones, in addition to tiered royalties, ranging from the low double digits to the high teens. Janssen will be responsible for commercialization worldwide. argenx retains the option to participate in commercialization efforts in the US, where the companies have agreed to share royalties on a 50/50 basis, and outside the U.S., Janssen will pay sales royalties ranging from the low double digits to the high teens to argenx.

F-37

Table of Contents

Under the terms of the agreement, Janssen committed to an upfront payment of $500 million consisting of a license payment of $300 million and a $200 million equity investment in the Company by subscribing to 1,766,899 new shares at a price of €100.02 per share, including an issuance premium. The agreement became effective in January 2019 following expiration of the waiting period under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act. In December 2019, the Company achieved the first development milestone, triggering a $25.0 million payment.

With regard to this collaboration with Janssen, the Company concluded as follows:

| · |  | There is one single performance obligation under IFRS 15, that being the transfer of a license combined with performance of research and development activities. The Company concluded that the license is not distinct in the context of the contract. Moreover, the Company concluded that the share premium that Janssen paid above the closing price on the day of entering into the investment agreement (being December 2, 2018) was paid because of the existing obligations to deliver development services under the terms of the collaboration agreement, and is therefore to be allocated to the single performance obligation.

| · |  | The transaction price of this agreement is currently composed of a fixed part, that being an upfront license fee and the share premium, and a variable part, that being milestone payments and cost reimbursements of research and development activities delivered. Milestone payments are only included in the transaction price as from the moment the achievement of the related milestone event is highly probable (usually at the time of achievement of the milestone event). Sales-based milestones and sales-based royalties are a part of the Company’s arrangements but are not yet included in its revenues, as its program with Janssen are still in the development phase.

| · |  | The transaction price has been allocated to the single performance obligation, and revenues have been recognized over the estimated service period based on a pattern that reflects the transfer of the license and progress to complete satisfaction of the research and development activities. This is because the transfer of the license is considered to be combined with the performance of research and development activities. Therefore, research and development milestone payments are variable considerations that are entirely allocated to the single performance obligation.

| · |  | The Company has chosen an input model to measure the satisfaction of the single performance obligation that considers percentage of costs incurred for these programs (percentage of completion method).

| · |  | Cost reimbursements received are recognized in revenues when costs are incurred and agreed by the parties, as the Company is acting as a principal in the scope of its stake of the research and development activities of its ongoing license and collaboration agreements.

18. Other operating income

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Grants |  | € | 2,289 |  | € | 1,842 |  | € | 422
Research and development incentives |  |  | 4,818 |  |  | 2,151 |  |  | 983
Payroll tax rebates |  |  | 5,694 |  |  | 3,756 |  |  | 3,436
|  | € | 12,801 |  | € | 7,749 |  | € | 4,841

F-38

Table of Contents

Grants

The Flanders Innovation and Entrepreneurship Agency provided the Company with several grants.

On December 31, 2019, the situation of the grants received by the Company reflected the expenses incurred by the Company in the various research and development projects sponsored by Flanders Innovation and Entrepreneurship Agency. On December 31, 2019, the Company had two ongoing grant research projects:

(Amounts presented in thousands of €) |  |  |
Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship - VLAIO 1 |  |  |
Grantor: Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship Agency |  |  |
Start date: |  |  | 01/11/2017
End date: |  |  | 31/10/2020
Amount granted and approved: |  | € | 2,527
Amount recognized: |  |  | 845

Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship - VLAIO 2 |  |  |
Grantor: Flanders Innovation & Entrepreneurship Agency |  |  |
Start date: |  |  | 01/05/2018
End date: |  |  | 31/10/2020
Amount granted and approved: |  | € | 2,634
Amount recognized: |  |  | 1,411

No conditions related to the above government grants were unfulfilled, nor were there any contingencies related thereon at the date of the approval of these consolidated financial statements, except for those described in note 29 of this report.

Other Incentives

Research and development incentives

The Company has accounted for a tax receivable of €4.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to €2.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2018, following a research and development tax incentive scheme in Belgium according to which the incentive will be refunded after a five year period, if not offset against the current tax payable over the period (see also note 7).

Payroll tax rebates

The Company accounted for €5.7 million payroll tax rebates in the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to €3.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2018, as a reduction in withholding income taxes for its highly‑qualified personnel employed in its research and development department.

F-39

Table of Contents

19. Segment reporting

The Company operates from the Netherlands, Belgium, the United States of America and Japan. Revenues are invoiced by the subsidiary in Belgium and are generated by clients geographically located as shown in the table below.

|  | Revenue from external customers |
|  | Year ended |
|  | December 31, |
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017 |
Netherlands |  | € |  |  | € | 470 |  | € | 628 |
Belgium |  |  | 1,498 |  |  | — |  |  | — |
Denmark |  |  | 436 |  |  | 1,136 |  |  | 6,240 |
Switzerland |  |  | 40,593 |  |  | 912 |  |  | 2,486 |
United States |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 1 |
Luxembourg |  |  | 27,256 |  |  | 18,964 |  |  | 27,060 |
Total |  | € | 69,783 |  | € | 21,482 |  | € | 36,415 |

Information about major clients:

The Company received €69.8 million of revenue from its external customers in the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to €21.5 million over the same period in 2018, of which €40.6 million came from the Company’s largest client, €27.3 million from its second largest client and €1.5 million from its third largest client, compared to respectively €19.0 million, €1.1 million and €0.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2018. For a detailed description of our key collaborations, see note 17.

The non-current assets of the Company are geographically located as shown in the table below:

|  | Non-current assets
|  | Year ended
|  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Netherlands |  | € | 1 |  | € | 1 |  | € | 1
Belgium |  |  | 56,777 |  |  | 5,967 |  |  | 4,103
United States |  |  | 3,058 |  |  | 47 |  |  | —
Japan |  |  | 284 |  |  | — |  |  | —
Total |  | € | 60,120 |  | € | 6,015 |  | € | 4,104

20. Research and development expenses

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Personnel expense |  | € | 45,733 |  | € | 26,519 |  | € | 16,473
External research and development expenses |  |  | 137,050 |  |  | 48,859 |  |  | 27,893
Materials and consumables |  |  | 2,027 |  |  | 1,464 |  |  | 1,562
Depreciation and amortization |  |  | 1,641 |  |  | 494 |  |  | 446
Other expenses |  |  | 11,214 |  |  | 6,273 |  |  | 5,366
|  | € | 197,665 |  | € | 83,609 |  | € | 51,740

F-40

Table of Contents

21. Selling, general and administrative expenses

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Personnel expense |  | € | 40,082 |  | € | 18,292 |  | € | 6,745
Consulting fees |  |  | 5,624 |  |  | 3,646 |  |  | 3,289
Marketing costs |  |  | 10,719 |  |  | 1,826 |  |  | —
Supervisory board |  |  | 2,792 |  |  | 1,088 |  |  | 621
Office costs |  |  | 5,352 |  |  | 2,619 |  |  | 1,793
|  | € | 64,569 |  | € | 27,471 |  | € | 12,448

22. Personnel expenses

The personnel expenses mentioned in note 20 and 21 above are as follows:

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Short‑term employee benefits—Salaries |  | € | 32,866 |  | € | 18,617 |  | € | 12,149
Short‑term employee benefits—Social Security |  |  | 3,555 |  |  | 2,213 |  |  | 1,504
Post‑employment benefits |  |  | 748 |  |  | 441 |  |  | 291
Termination benefits |  |  | 644 |  |  | 96 |  |  | 8
Share‑based payment |  |  | 37,208 |  |  | 18,527 |  |  | 3,985
Employer social security contributions stock options |  |  | 10,794 |  |  | 4,918 |  |  | 5,281
|  | € | 85,815 |  | € | 44,812 |  | € | 23,218

The post‑employment benefits relate to the pension plans the Company has in place for its employees.

The number of full‑time equivalents (FTE) employees by department is presented below:

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
Number of FTE |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Research and development |  |  | 116.9 |  |  | 74.4 |  |  | 56.8
Selling, general and administrative |  |  | 69.2 |  |  | 29.5 |  |  | 14.7
|  |  | 186.1 |  |  | 103.9 |  |  | 71.5

These FTE’s are working outside the Netherlands.

23. Leases

The statement of financial position shows the following amounts relating to leases:

|  | As on |  | As on
|  | December 31, |  | January 1,
In thousands of € |  | 2019 |  | 2019
Right-of-use assets |  |  |  |  |  |
Buildings |  | € | 5,576 |  | € | 2,338
Vehicles |  |  | 744 |  |  | 525
Equipment |  |  | 243 |  |  | 242
|  | € | 6,564 |  | € | 3,105
Lease liabilities |  |  |  |  |  |
Current |  | € | 1,974 |  | € | 1,078
Non-current |  |  | 4,540 |  |  | 1,712
|  | € | 6,514 |  | € | 2,790

F-41

Table of Contents

Additions to the right-of-use assets amounted to €5.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2019.

The table below shows a maturity analysis of the lease liabilities as on December 31, 2019:

(in thousands of €) | Less than 1 year |  | 1-3 years |  | 3-5 years |  | More than 5 years |  | Total contractual cash flows |  | Carrying amount
Lease liabilities | € | 2,205 |  | € | 3,137 |  | € | 1,251 |  | € | 432 |  | € | 7,025 |  | € | 6,514

The statement of profit or loss and other comprehensive income shows the following amounts relating to leases:

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
In thousands of € |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Depreciation charges |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Buildings |  | € | 1,315 |  | € | — |  | € | —
Vehicles |  |  | 233 |  |  | — |  |  | —
Equipment |  |  | 28 |  |  | 11 |  |  | —
|  | € | 1,576 |  | € | 11 |  | € | —
Interest expense (included in finance cost) |  | € | 105 |  | € | — |  | € | —
Expense relating to short-term leases |  |  | 123 |  |  | — |  |  | —
Expense relating to leases of low-value assets that are not shown above as short-term leases |  |  | 5 |  |  | — |  |  | —

The total cash outflow for leases in 2019 was €1.6 million. The Company’s new accounting policy for leases is described in note 2.6.

The Company did not enter into any lease agreement with variable lease payments or residual value guarantees. The Company has leases that include extension options. These options provide flexibility in managing the leased assets and align with the Company’s business needs. The Company exercises judgement in deciding whether it is reasonably certain that the extension options will be exercised. The Company leases offices and laboratory space in Zwijnaarde, Belgium. The contract contains an extension option for three years. The Company also leases office space in Boston, Massachusetts. The contract contains an extension option for five years.

The Company has entered into an additional lease for office space in Tokyo, Japan in January 2020. The minimum lease term of three years and two months results in a contractually agreed cash outflow of ¥ 233.5 million (€1.9 million).

24. Financial result and exchange gains/(losses)

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Interest income on bank deposits |  | € | 7,874 |  | € | 1,371 |  | € | 165
Net gains on current financial assets at FVTPL |  |  | 6,525 |  |  | 2,323 |  |  | 210
Realized gain on non-current financial assets |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 875
Financial income |  |  | 14,399 |  |  | 3,694 |  |  | 1,250
Financial expense |  |  | (124) |  |  | — |  |  | —
Realized exchange gains/(losses) |  |  | (338) |  |  | 1,355 |  |  | —
Unrealized exchange gains/(losses) |  |  | 6,404 |  |  | 10,953 |  |  | (5,797)
Exchange gains/(losses) |  |  | 6,066 |  |  | 12,308 |  |  | (5,797)

F-42

Table of Contents

The exchange gains of €6.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2019 were primarily attributable to unrealized exchange rate gains on our cash and cash equivalents and current financial assets position in USD due to the favorable fluctuation of the USD exchange rate over the period.

25. Income tax expense

The income tax expense for the year can be reconciled to the accounting loss as follows:

|  | Year Ended
|  | December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Loss before taxes |  |  | (158,213) |  |  | (65,847) |  |  | (27,479)
Income tax calculated at 25% |  |  | 39,553 |  |  | 16,462 |  |  | 6,870
Effect of expenses that are not deductible in determining taxable results |  |  | (7,701) |  |  | (3,934) |  |  | (1,141)
Effect of stock issue expenses that are not deductible in determining taxable results |  |  | 5,750 |  |  | 3,716 |  |  | 5,754
Effect of concessions (R&D incentives and grants) |  |  | 572 |  |  | 430 |  |  | 453
Effect of tax losses carried forward not recognized (Netherlands) |  |  | (356) |  |  | — |  |  | —
Effect of usage of tax losses carried forward not previously recognized (Netherlands) |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 19,378
Effect of tax losses carried forward not recognized (Belgium) |  |  | (11,314) |  |  | (5,511) |  |  | (27,413)
Effect of adjustments for current tax of prior periods (Belgium) |  |  | (3,876) |  |  | — |  |  | —
Effect of change in corporate tax rate on deferred tax asset not previously recognized (Belgium) |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | 373
Effect of different tax rates in jurisdictions in which the company operates |  |  | (52) |  |  | (15) |  |  | (517)
Deferred tax asset other than loss carryforwards not recognized |  |  | (27,341) |  |  | (11,968) |  |  | (4,363)
Other |  |  | 13 |  |  | 26 |  |  | 9
Income tax expense recognized in the consolidated statement of profit and loss |  | € | (4,752) |  | € | (794) |  | € | (597)

The tax rate used for the 2019, 2018 and 2017 reconciliations above is the corporate income tax rate of 25% payable by corporate entities in the Netherlands.

The unrecognized deferred tax asset on deductible temporary differences and unused tax losses amounts to €40.0 million on December 31, 2019, compared to €29.3 million on December 31, 2018. Deferred tax have been measured using the effective rate that will apply in Belgium (25%). The Company has unused tax losses carried forward for an amount of €160.0 million on December 31, 2019 (compared to €117.1 million on December 31, 2018), of which €1.4 million will expire in 2028. This, combined with other temporary differences, resulted in a net deferred tax asset position. Due to the uncertainty surrounding the Company’s ability to realize taxable profits in the near future, the Company did not recognize any deferred tax assets.

As part of its business restructuring, the Company transferred the legal ownership of its intellectual property rights from the Dutch argenx SE to its wholly owned Belgian subsidiary, argenx BV, effective as of January 1, 2017, for an amount of €79.9 million. In 2019, the Company has obtained a tax ruling in Belgium which allows for a treatment of the aforementioned amount as a tax deductible cost in the Belgian subsidiary.

26. Loss per share

|  | Year Ended December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Loss of the year |  | € | (162,965) |  | € | (66,641) |  | € | (28,076)
Weighted average number of shares outstanding |  |  | 38,619,121 |  |  | 33,419,356 |  |  | 24,609,536
Basic and diluted loss per share (in €) |  | € | (4.22) |  | € | (1.99) |  | € | (1.14)

Earnings/losses per ordinary share are calculated by dividing the loss for the period by the weighted average number of ordinary shares during the year.

F-43

Table of Contents

As the Company is suffering operating losses, options have an anti‑dilutive effect. As such, there is no difference between basic and diluted earnings/losses per ordinary share. There are no other instruments that could potentially dilute earnings per ordinary share in the future.

27. Financial instruments and financial risk management

Overview of financial instruments

This note provides information about the Company’s financial instruments, including:

| · |  | an overview of all financial instruments by category

| · |  | specific information about each type of financial instrument

| · |  | information about determining the fair value of the instruments, including judgements and estimation uncertainty involved.

| · |  | information on the financial risk management and capital management.

|  | Measurement category |  | Carrying amount
|  |  |  | Year Ended December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  |  |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017 (1)
Financial assets — non-current |  | FVTPL |  | € | 2,596 |  |  | 1 |  | € | 1
Research and development incentive receivables — non-current |  | Amortised cost |  |  | 8,566 |  |  | 4,883 |  |  | 3,033
Restricted cash — non-current |  | Amortised cost |  |  | 630 |  |  | 251 |  |  | 256
Trade and other receivables |  | Amortised cost |  |  | 28,115 |  |  | 2,886 |  |  | 2,842
Prepaid expenses |  | Amortised cost |  |  | 9,022 |  |  | 2,995 |  |  | 2,338
Financial assets—current |  | FVTPL |  |  | 1,004,539 |  |  | 283,529 |  |  | 168,907
Research and development incentive receivables — current |  | Amortised cost |  |  | 261 |  |  | 301 |  |  | 158
Restricted cash — current |  | Amortised cost |  |  | — |  |  | 1,692 |  |  | 1,692
Cash and cash equivalents |  | Amortised cost |  |  | 331,282 |  |  | 281,040 |  |  | 190,867
Trade and other payables |  | Amortised cost |  |  | 85,301 |  |  | 37,072 |  |  | 15,285

| (1) |  | The Company adopted IFRS 9 on January 1, 2018. Under IAS 39, non-current financial assets were measured as “Available for sale”.

Current financial assets included collective investment funds nominated in € and $ that are not considered as cash equivalents and of which the underlying investments include bonds and other international debt securities. The average credit rating of the underlying instruments is BBB or higher. The maximum exposure to credit risk is the carrying value at reporting date. These investment funds are recognized at fair value in the Company’s consolidated financial statements (level 1). The fair value corresponds to the quoted market price and can therefore

F-44

Table of Contents

be classified as a level 1 fair value measurement. The net asset value (NAV) of the funds is available on a daily basis. Any difference between amounts invested and fair value at reporting date is booked in Profit & Loss.

Due to the current nature of the financial liabilities, the nominal value of all financial liabilities presented above approximates their fair value.

The Company carried the following assets at fair value on December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 respectively:

|  | At December 31,2019
(in thousands of €) |  | Level 1 |  | Level 2 |  | Level 3
Non-current financial assets |  | € |  |  | € |  |  | € | 2,596
Current financial assets |  |  | 1,004,539 |  |  |  |  |  |
Assets carried at fair value |  | € | 1,004,539 |  | € | — |  | € | 2,596

|  | At December 31,2018
(in thousands of €) |  | Level 1 |  | Level 2 |  | Level 3
Non-current financial assets |  | € |  |  | € |  |  | € | 1
Current financial assets |  |  | 283,529 |  |  |  |  |  |
Assets carried at fair value |  | € | 283,529 |  | € | — |  | € | 1

|  | At December 31,2017
(in thousands of €) |  | Level 1 |  | Level 2 |  | Level 3
Non-current financial assets |  | € |  |  | € |  |  | € | 1
Current financial assets |  |  | 168,907 |  |  |  |  |  |
Assets carried at fair value |  | € | 168,907 |  | € | — |  | € | 1

During the disclosed calendar year no transfers occurred between the applicable categories.

In March 2019, the Company entered into a license agreement with AgomAb Therapeutics NV for the use of HGF-mimetic SIMPLE Antibodies™, developed under the Company’s Innovative Access Program. In exchange for granting this license, the Company received a profit share in AgomAb Therapeutics NV. The profit share has been designated as a non-current financial asset held at fair value through profit or loss. Since AgomAb Therapeutics NV is a private company, the valuation of the profit share is based on level 3 assumptions.

Capital risk

The Company manages its capital to ensure that it will be able to continue as a going concern. The capital structure of the Company consists of equity attributed to the holders of equity instruments of the Company, such as capital, reserves and accumulated losses as mentioned in the consolidated statement of changes in equity. The Company makes the necessary adjustments in the light of changes in the economic circumstances, risks associated to the different assets and the projected cash needs of the current and projected research activities. On December 31, 2019, cash and cash equivalents amounted to €331.3 million and total capital amounted to €1,312.8 million. The current cash situation and the anticipated cash generation are the most important parameters in assessing the capital structure. The Company’s objective is to maintain the capital structure at a level to be able to finance its activities for at least twelve months. Cash income from existing and new partnerships is taken into account and, if needed and possible, the Company can issue new shares or enter into financing agreements.

Credit risk

Credit risk refers to the risk that a counterparty will default on its contractual obligations resulting in financial loss to the Company. The Company has adopted a policy of only dealing with creditworthy counterparties and obtaining sufficient collateral, where appropriate, as a means of mitigating the risk of financial loss from defaults. Concentrations in credit risk are determined based on an analysis of counterparties and their importance on the overall outstanding contractual obligations at year end.

The Company has a limited number of collaboration partners and therefore has a significant concentration of credit risk. However, it has policies in place to ensure that credit exposure is kept to a minimum and significant

F-45

Table of Contents

concentrations of credit exposure are only granted for short periods of time to high credit quality collaboration partners.

Credit exposure is controlled by counterparty limits that are reviewed and approved by management annually.

Cash and cash equivalents and short‑term deposits are invested with several highly reputable banks and financial institutions. The Company holds its cash and cash equivalents mainly with different banks which are independently rated with a minimum rating of ‘A-’.

The Company also holds short term investment funds in the form of money market funds with a recommended investment horizon of 6 months or shorter but with a low historical volatility. These money market funds are highly liquid investments, can be readily convertible into a known amount of cash. Since they are a basket of funds there is no individual credit risk involved.

The average credit rating of the underlying instruments for the investment funds is BBB or higher.

The maximum credit risk, to which the Company is theoretically exposed as at the balance sheet date, is the carrying amount of the financial assets.

At the end of the reporting period no financial assets were past due, consequently no financial assets were subject to impairment.

Liquidity risk

The Company manages liquidity risk by maintaining adequate reserves, by continuously monitoring forecast and actual cash flows, and by matching the maturity profiles of financial assets and liabilities.

The Company’s main sources of cash inflows are obtained through capital increases and collaboration agreements. This cash is invested in savings accounts, term accounts and short term investment funds in the form of money market funds. These money market funds represent the majority of the Company’s available sources of liquidity however since all of these are immediately tradable and convertible in cash they have a limited impact on the liquidity risk.

All financial liabilities (principally trade and other payables as disclosed in note 27) have a maturity within 3 months unless otherwise disclosed in these consolidated financial statements.

Interest rate risk

The only interest‑bearing financial assets are cash at banks on deposit and term accounts. For the year ended December 31, 2019, if applicable interest rates would increase/decrease by 25 basis points, this would have a positive/negative impact of €2.0 million (compared to €0.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2018 and €0.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2017).

Foreign exchange risk

The Company undertakes transactions denominated in foreign currencies; consequently, exposures to exchange rate fluctuations arise. The Company is mainly exposed to the U.S. Dollar, Japanse yen, British pound and Swiss franc. To limit this risk, the Company attempts to align incoming and outgoing cash flows in currencies other than EUR.

F-46

Table of Contents

The net exposure to exchange differences of the monetary assets (being cash, cash equivalents and current financial assets) of the Company at the end of the reporting period are as follows:

|  | At December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
USD |  | 821,916 |  | 312,831 |  | 147,169
JPY |  | 488 |  | — |  | —
GBP |  | 4 |  | 2 |  | 406
CHF |  | 1 |  | 4 |  | 25

On December 31, 2019, if the USD/EUR exchange rate would have increased/decreased by 10%, this would have had a negative/positive impact of €74.72 million (compared to €28.44 million on December 31, 2018). On December 31, 2019, if the exchange rate for other currencies would have increased/decreased by 10% , this would have had no significant impact.

28. Related party transactions

Balances and transactions between the Company and its subsidiaries, which are related parties of the Company, have been eliminated on consolidation and are not disclosed in this note. There were no significant transactions with related parties during the period, other than compensation of key management personnel.

Compensation of key management personnel

Key management personnel of the Company is composed of the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer, the Chief Operating Officer, the Chief Scientific Officer, the Chief Medical Officer, the Vice President of Corporate Development & Strategy and the General Counsel.

The remuneration of the key management personnel during the year was as follows:

|  | Year Ended December 31,
(in thousands of €) |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
Short term employee benefits |  | € | 4,437 |  | € | 4,236 |  | € | 3,126
Post employment benefits |  |  | 144 |  |  | 153 |  |  | 115
Termination benefits |  |  | 470 |  |  | — |  |  | —
Share‑based payment (1) |  |  | 21,847 |  |  | 13,363 |  |  | 12,041
Employer social security contributions stock options (2) |  |  | 9,160 |  |  | 2,792 |  |  | 3,073
|  | € | 36,058 |  | € | 20,544 |  | € | 18,355

| (1) |  | Amount shown represents the expenses with respect to the option awards granted in the year, measured using the Black Scholes formula. The share-based payment expense recognized in the consolidated statement of comprehensive income totaled €14.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to €10.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2018 and €2.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2017

| (2) |  | The Company incurs employer social security costs with respect to the option awards granted to certain members of the executive management. The amount of employer social security costs depends on the actual economic value realized and therefore varies based on our stock price. At each reporting date, the Company makes a calculation of the exposure.

Remuneration of the executive directors

The tables below show the remuneration received by executive directors for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 (in €). Eric Castaldi served as a member of our board until April 26, 2017. A scenario analysis based on best practice clause II.2.1. of the Dutch Corporate Governance Code was made. Executive directors have

F-47

Table of Contents

met each of their bonus targets previously established by the non-executive directors during the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 and the full bonus was granted in the same year.

|  |  |  |  |  | Pension |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
2017 |  | Base salary |  | Bonus |  | contributions |  | Social security costs |  | ESOP (1) |  | Other (2) |  | Total
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 303,941 |  | 301,635 |  | 14,315 |  | 9,459 |  | 2,968,195 |  | 9,601 |  | 3,607,146
Eric Castaldi |  | 271,344 |  | 173,284 |  | 62,335 |  | 254,732 |  | 4,089,209 |  | 14,979 |  | 4,865,883
Total |  | 575,285 |  | 474,919 |  | 76,650 |  | 264,191 |  | 7,057,404 |  | 24,580 |  | 8,473,029

|  |  |  |  |  | Pension |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
2018 |  | Base salary |  | Bonus |  | contributions |  | Social security costs |  | ESOP (1) |  | Other (2) |  | Total
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 500,000 |  | 284,600 |  | 15,102 |  | 10,011 |  | 3,559,200 |  | 33,855 |  | 4,402,768
Total |  | 500,000 |  | 284,600 |  | 15,102 |  | 10,011 |  | 3,559,200 |  | 33,855 |  | 4,402,768

|  |  |  |  |  | Pension |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
2019 |  | Base salary |  | Bonus |  | contributions |  | Social security costs |  | ESOP (1) |  | Other (2) |  | Total
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 525,000 |  | 326,288 |  | 21,532 |  | 10,587 |  | 5,257,360 |  | 11,558 |  | 6,152,325
Total |  | 525,000 |  | 326,288 |  | 21,532 |  | 10,587 |  | 5,257,360 |  | 11,558 |  | 6,152,325

| (1) |  | Amount shown represents the expenses with respect to the option awards granted in the year, measured using the Black Scholes formula, and the employer social security costs with respect to the option awards granted to certain members of the executive management. The amount of employer social security costs depends on the actual economic value realized and therefore varies based on our stock price. At each reporting date, the Company makes a calculation of the exposure.

| (2) |  | Consists of rent paid by the Company, costs attributable to the lease of a company car and employer-paid medical insurance premiums.

The table below shows the number of stock options granted to the executive directors during the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 and their exercise price equal to the fair market value upon date of grant, and the stock options exercised during 2019, 2018 and 2017.

2017 |  | ESOPs |  | Term |  | Exercise price |  | Exercised
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 80,000 |  | 10 | years | 21.17 |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 2.44 |  | 65,380
Eric Castaldi |  | 43,200 |  | 10 | years | 21.17 |  |
Total |  | 123,200 |  |  |  |  |  | 65,380

2018 |  | ESOPs |  | Term |  | Exercise price |  | Exercised
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 80,000 |  | 10 | years | 86.32 |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 7.17 |  | 40,000
Total |  | 80,000 |  |  |  |  |  | 40,000

2019 |  | ESOPs |  | Term |  | Exercise price |  | Exercised
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 80,000 |  | 10 | years | 135.75 |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 7.17 |  | 30,000
Total |  | 80,000 |  |  |  |  |  | 30,000

F-48

Table of Contents

The table below shows the stock options held at the start of the year ended December 31, 2019, the stock options granted to executive directors which have vested during the year ended December 31, 2019 and the stock options to vest in the years until 2022.

|  | Total |  |  |  |  |  | Total |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  | options |  |  |  |  |  | options |  | Options |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  | held on |  | options |  | options |  | held on |  | vested |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  | Options |  |
|  | January 1, |  | granted in |  | exercised in |  | December 31, |  | until |  | Exercise |  | vested in |  | Exercise |  | to vest |  | Exercise |  | to vest |  | Exercise |  | to vest |  | Exercise
Name |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | price |  | 2019 |  | price |  | 2020 |  | price |  | 2021 |  | price |  | 2022 |  | price
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 336,200 |  | 80,000 |  | (30,000) |  | 386,200 |  | 35,000 |  | 7.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 30,600 |  | 9.47 |  |  |  | 9.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 43,056 |  | 11.47 |  | 6,944 |  | 11.47 |  |  |  | 11.47 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 20,400 |  | 14.13 |  | 10,200 |  | 14.13 |  |  |  | 14.13 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 26,667 |  | 21.17 |  | 26,666 |  | 21.17 |  | 26,667 |  | 21.17 |  |  |  | 21.17 |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 26,667 |  | 86.32 |  | 26,666 |  | 86.32 |  | 26,667 |  | 86.32 |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 26,667 |  | 135.75 |  | 26,666 |  | 135.75 |  | 26,667 |  | 135.75

The table below shows the remaining term of the options held by the executive directors on December 31, 2019.

Name |  | Number of options |  | Remaining term at December 31, 2019 (rounded up) |  |
Tim Van Hauwermeiren |  | 35,000 |  | 5.0 |  | years
|  | 30,600 |  | 6.0 |  | years
|  | 50,000 |  | 6.5 |  | years
|  | 30,600 |  | 7.0 |  | years
|  | 80,000 |  | 8.0 |  | years
|  | 80,000 |  | 9.0 |  | years
|  | 80,000 |  | 10.0 |  | years

Stock options are granted to the executive directors by the Board based on the recommendation of the Remuneration and Nomination Committee and the option allocation scheme established by the Board pursuant to the argenx Employee Stock Option Plan.

Remuneration of non-executive directors

The following table sets forth the information regarding the compensation earned by our non‑executive directors during the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017:

|  |  | 2019 |  |  | 2018 |  |  | 2017
Peter Verhaeghe |  | € | 77,500 |  | € | 77,500 |  | € | 77,500
David L Lacey |  |  | 50,000 |  |  | 50,000 |  |  | 50,000
Werner Lanthaler |  |  | 55,000 |  |  | 55,000 |  |  | 55,000
Pamela Klein |  |  | 42,500 |  |  | 42,500 |  |  | 42,500
Don Debethizy |  |  | 52,500 |  |  | 52,500 |  |  | 52,500
A.A. Rosenberg |  |  | 50,000 |  |  | 42,500 |  |  | 42,500
James M. Daly |  |  | 50,000 |  |  | 35,000 |  |  | —
Total |  | € | 377,500 |  | € | 355,000 |  | € | 320,000

F-49

Table of Contents

The table below shows the number of stock options granted to the non-executive directors during the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 and their exercise price, based on the 30 day average stock price prior to their date of grant, and the stock options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017.

2017 |  | ESOPs |  | Term |  | Exercise price |  | Exercised
David L Lacey |  | 15,000 |  | 10 | years | 21.37 |  |
Total |  | 15,000 |  |  |  |  |  | —

2018 |  | ESOPs |  | Term |  | Exercise price |  | Exercised
James M. Daly |  | 15,000 |  | 10 | years | 80.82 |  |
Peter Verhaeghe |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 86.32 |  |
David L Lacey |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 86.32 |  |
Werner Lanthaler |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 86.32 |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 2.44 |  | 3,566
|  |  |  |  |  | 7.17 |  | 5,000
|  |  |  |  |  | 2.44 |  | 10,850
|  |  |  |  |  | 11.38 |  | 5,556
Don Debethizy |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 86.32 |  |
Pamela Klein |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 86.32 |  |
A.A. Rosenberg |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 86.32 |  |
James M. Daly |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 86.32 |  |
Total |  | 85,000 |  |  |  |  |  | 24,972

2019 |  | ESOPs |  | Term |  | Exercise price |  | Exercised
Peter Verhaeghe |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 135.75 |  |
David L Lacey |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 135.75 |  |
Werner Lanthaler |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 135.75 |  |
|  |  |  |  |  | 11.38 |  | 4,444
Pamela Klein |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 135.75 |  |
Don Debethizy |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 135.75 |  |
A.A. Rosenberg |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 135.75 |  |
James M. Daly |  | 10,000 |  | 10 | years | 135.75 |  |
Total |  | 70,000 |  |  |  |  |  | 4,444

F-50

Table of Contents

The table below shows the stock options held at the start of the year ended December 31, 2019 and the stock options granted to the non‑executive directors which have vested during the year ended December 31, 2019, as well as the stock options to vest in the years ending December 31, 2020, December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2022 (in number of stock options), and the respective exercise price of such stock options:

|  | Total |  |  |  |  |  | Total |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |
|  | options |  | Options |  | Options |  | options |  | Options |  |  |  |  | Options |  |  |  |  | to |  |  |  |  | to |  |  |  |  | to |  |  |
|  | held on |  | granted |  | exercised |  | held on |  | vested |  |  |  |  | vested |  |  |  |  | vest |  |  |  |  | vest |  |  |  |  | vest |  |  |
|  | January 1, |  | in |  | in |  | December 31, |  | until |  |  | Exercise |  | in |  |  | Exercise |  | in |  | Exercise |  | in |  | Exercise |  | in |  | Exercise
Name |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  |  | price |  | 2019 |  |  | price |  | 2020 |  | price |  | 2021 |  | price |  | 2022 |  | price
Peter Verhaeghe |  | 44,585 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 54,585 |  | 11,626 |  | € | 2.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,959 |  | € | 3.95 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 5,000 |  | € | 7.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 8,333 |  | € | 11.38 |  | 1,667 |  | € | 11.38 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
David L. Lacey |  | 54,443 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 64,443 |  | 6,643 |  | € | 2.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 12,800 |  | € | 7.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 8,333 |  | € | 11.38 |  | 1,667 |  | € | 11.38 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 5,000 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 5,000 |  | € | 21.17 |  | 5,000 |  | € | 21.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
Werner Lanthaler |  | 14,444 |  | 10,000 |  | (4,444) |  | 20,000 |  | — |  | € | 2.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | — |  | € | 7.17 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | — |  | € | 11.38 |  | — |  | € | 11.38 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
J. Donald deBethizy |  | 35,000 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 45,000 |  | 15,000 |  | € | 11.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 8,333 |  | € | 11.38 |  | 1,667 |  | € | 11.38 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
Pamela Klein |  | 35,000 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 45,000 |  | 15,000 |  | € | 11.44 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 8,333 |  | € | 11.38 |  | 1,667 |  | € | 11.38 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
A.A. Rosenberg |  | 25,000 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 35,000 |  | 10,000 |  | € | 14.13 |  | 5,000 |  | € | 14.13 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75
James M. Daly |  | 25,000 |  | 10,000 |  |  |  | 35,000 |  |  |  |  |  |  | 7,500 |  | € | 80.82 |  | 5,000 |  | € | 80.82 |  | 2,500 |  | € | 80.82 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 86.32 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 86.32 |  |  |  |  |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,334 |  | € | 135.75 |  | 3,333 |  | € | 135.75

F-51

Table of Contents

The table below shows the remaining term of the stock options held by the non‑executive directors on December 31, 2019.

|  |  |  | Remaining term on
|  | Number of |  | December 31, 2019
Name |  | stock options |  | (rounded up)
Peter K.M. Verhaeghe |  | 3,650 |  | 0.5 years
|  | 2,340 |  | 1.0 years
|  | 5,560 |  | 3.5 years
|  | 3,181 |  | 4.0 years
|  | 9,854 |  | 5.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 6.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
David L. Lacey |  | 3,180 |  | 3.5 years
|  | 1,818 |  | 4.0 years
|  | 14,445 |  | 5.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 6.5 years
|  | 15,000 |  | 8.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
Werner Lanthaler |  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
J. Donald deBethizy |  | 15,000 |  | 5.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 6.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
Pamela Klein |  | 15,000 |  | 5.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 6.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
A.A. Rosenberg |  | 15,000 |  | 7.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years
James M. Daly |  | 15,000 |  | 8.5 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 9.0 years
|  | 10,000 |  | 10.0 years

Stock options are granted to the non-executive directors by the Board based on the recommendation of the Remuneration and Nomination Committee, and the option allocation scheme established by the board pursuant to the argenx Employee Stock Option Plan.

29. Contingencies

The Company is currently not facing any outstanding claims or litigations that may have a significant adverse impact on the Company’s financial position.

As described in note 18, the Company has received several types of government grants which are granted subject to a certain number of conditions that need to be met at grant date and in the future. The Company recognizes grant income from Belgian and Flemish grant bodies when all contractual conditions are met. These government institutions may however subsequently perform an audit which may result in a (partial) claw back of the grant. The Company deems that the claw back risk is remote in view of the continuous monitoring of the contractual conditions. The Company has fulfilled all existing conditions relating to the recognition of its grant income.

Contracts with these grant bodies also typically include clauses that define the need for future validation of the project results after completion of the initial grant term during which the subsidized expenses or investments have been incurred and for which the grant was earned. Should this validation not occur or be deemed inadequate, the grant bodies have the right to reclaim funds previously granted.

F-52

Table of Contents

As described in note 13, in 2019, the Company granted a total of 1,365,172 stock options to certain of its employees, Board members and consultants. As part of the grant of these stock options, the Company has undertaken to compensate Belgian taxes that are paid upon the grant of these stock options if and when at the end of the exercise period, the stock price would be lower than the exercise price, as increased with these taxes. The Company has applied for a tax ruling on this subject that would cover the stock option grants as from June 28, 2018. The exposure that the Company could face at the end of the exercise period for the stock options granted in 2018 and 2019 ranges from €7.6 million to €8.6 million.

30. Commitments

At balance sheet date, there were no commitments signed for the acquisition of property, plant and equipment. In February 2019, the Company entered into a global collaboration and license agreement with Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. Under the terms of the agreement, the Company will pay $10.0 million per target for future target nominations and potential future payments of up to $160.0 million per selected target subject to achievement of specified development, regulatory and sales-based milestones and up to $40.0 million subject to the achievement of additional, specified sales-based milestones. This amount represents the maximum amount that would be paid if all milestones would be achieved but excludes variable royalty payments based on unit sales. For the year ended December 31, 2019, the Company exercised the option to nominate an additional target (triggering a $10 million development milestone payment) and initiated a Phase 1 clinical trial using Halozyme's proprietary ENHANZE® drug delivery technology (triggering a $5 million development milestone payment).

The Company’s manufacturing commitments with its drug substance manufacturing contractor Lonza relate to the ongoing execution of the BLA services for efgartigimod and the ongoing manufacturing activities related to the start-up of Lonza Singapore as a potential future commercial manufacturing site. In December 2018, the Company signed its first commercial supply agreement with Lonza related to the reservation of commercial drug substance supply capacity for efgartigimod. The total commitment under this commercial supply agreement amounts to a minimum commitment of £25.3 million over a period of five years starting from 2020. In the aggregate, the Company has outstanding commitments for efgartigimod of approximately €53.4 million. In addition, the Company also has contractual obligations for cusatuzumab of approximately €34.4 million and for ARGX-117 of approximately €3.6 million.

31. Audit fees

The following auditors’ fees were expensed in the income statement:

|  | Year Ended December 31,
Fees |  | 2019 |  | 2018 |  | 2017
|  | in thousands of €
Audit fees (1) |  | € | 730 |  | € | 648 |  | € | 179
Audit-related fees |  |  | 159 |  |  | 143 |  |  | 724
Tax and other services (2) |  |  | — |  |  | — |  |  | —
Total |  | € | 889 |  | € | 791 |  | € | 903

| (1) |  | Audit services performed by Deloitte Accountants B.V. as the external auditor referred to in Section 1 of the Dutch Accounting Firms Oversight Act (Wta) as well as by the Deloitte network.

| (2) |  | Tax and other services performed by the Deloitte network.

F-53

Table of Contents

32. Overview of consolidation scope

The parent company argenx SE is domiciled in the Netherlands. The Company, argenx SE, has one subsidiary, argenx BV, based in Belgium. argenx BV has two subsidiary, argenx US, Inc., based in the United States of America and argenx Japan KK, based in Japan. Details of the Company’s consolidated entities at the end of the reporting period are as follows:

Name |  | Registration number |  | Country |  | Participation |  | Main activity
argenx SE |  | COC 24435214 |  | The Netherlands |  | 100.00 | % | Holding company
argenx BV |  | 0818292196 |  | Belgium |  | 100.00 | % | Biotechnical research on drugs and pharma processes
argenx US, Inc. |  | 36-4880497 |  | USA |  | 100.00 | % | Pharmaceuticals and pharmacy supplies merchant wholesalers
argenx Japan KK |  | 0104-01-145183 |  | Japan |  | 100.00 | % | Pharmaceuticals and pharmacy supplies merchant wholesalers

33. Events after the balance sheet date

The recent outbreak of COVID-19 originated in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 and has since spread to multiple countries, including the United States and several European countries. On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the outbreak a pandemic. The spread of COVID-19 has impacted the global economy and may impact our operations, including the potential interruption of our clinical trial activities and our supply chain. For example, the COVID-19 outbreak may delay enrollment in our clinical trials due to prioritization of hospital resources toward the outbreak, and some patients may be unwilling to enroll in our trials or be unable to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services, which would delay our ability to conduct clinical trials or release clinical trial results. The spread of an infectious disease, including COVID-19, may also result in the inability of our suppliers to deliver clinical drug supplies on a timely basis or at all. In addition, hospitals may reduce staffing and reduce or postpone certain treatments in response to the spread of an infectious disease. Such events may result in a period of business disruption, and in reduced operations, or doctors and medical providers may be unwilling to participate in our clinical trials, any of which could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. The extent to which the recent global COVID-19 pandemic impacts our business will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including new information that may emerge concerning the severity of COVID-19 and the actions to contain or treat its impact, among others. Any significant infectious disease outbreak, including the COVID-19 pandemic, could result in a widespread health crisis that could adversely affect the economies and financial markets worldwide, resulting in an economic downturn that could impact our business, financial condition and results of operations, including our ability to obtain additional funding, if needed. The Company is proactively executing risk mitigation strategies to attenuate the impact of COVID-19.

F-54

Table of Contents

(This page has been left blank intentionally.)