Environment

Climate Change (E1)

Material Impacts, Risks and Opportunities (SBM-3)

Advancing innovative immunology therapies requires energy use across laboratories, offices, logistics, and strategic partnerships with CROs, CMOs, and suppliers in key markets across the globe. These activities are essential to sustaining our research and operations but do generate GHG emissions across both our direct operations and our wider value chain. Our approach to climate change focuses on understanding and addressing the environmental impacts associated with our energy use and GHG emissions. This includes ongoing monitoring of climate risk assessment results and continued engagement with suppliers to improve the quality of emissions data. Strengthening this data foundation enables informed decisions on energy efficiency, targeted supplier collaboration, and the progressive adoption of lower carbon technologies—such as the transition to a fully electric fleet in Belgium—to support long-term resilience and reduce exposure to evolving regulatory expectations.

Climate Change Mitigation (IRO-1, SBM-3)

Climate Risk Assessment

In 2024, we conducted a scenario-based climate risk assessment to evaluate exposure to physical and transition risks. The scenario analysis examined how exposure to risks could evolve over time under different warming pathways. Time horizons were defined as short term (0–5 years), medium term (5–15 years), and long term (15+ years), consistent with Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) guidance. These differ from other IRO timeframes to align with best practice in climate-scenario modeling. No critical climate-related assumptions have been made in our financial statements to date, and the climate scenarios used in this assessment are not reflected in asset valuations, depreciation schedules, or other financial estimates.

Physical Risks

The physical risk screening used three scenarios from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): SSP1 (below 2°C), SSP2 (2–4°C), and SSP5 (3.3–5.7°C), with the main focus on SSP5 as this scenario represents the highest expected impacts from climate change. Models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) were used to project hazard exposure at baseline, 2030, and 2050. Both projected exposure and changes from baseline were considered when determining whether a climate hazard could have a substantive impact on our operations.

Eight hazards (extreme heat, coastal flooding, pluvial flooding, riverine flooding, wildfires, water stress, drought, and cyclones) were analyzed using IPCC AR6-aligned scenarios and CMIP datasets to model exposure at baseline, 2030, and 2050 horizons. Results were reviewed to identify hazards most likely to impact operations under the SSP5 (high-warming) scenario.

The assessment covered 43 key locations within our value chain, including own operations (12 office sites), suppliers (28 sites), and customers (3 sites) across North America, Europe, and Asia Pacific. The assessment was conducted at the inherent level, without considering existing adaptation or mitigation measures. Sensitivity to hazards was evaluated based on historical exposure and potential operational disruption. Results may inform strategic and risk management decisions, including contingency planning, supply source diversification, and location selection. For example, office sites were found to have low sensitivity, whereas some contract manufacturers could face greater disruption from extreme weather events. Future assessments may incorporate adaptive measures to further refine understanding of climate resilience.

Transition Risks

Transition risks were assessed qualitatively across four categories (policy and legal, market, technology, and reputation) based on the TCFD framework. Thirteen sub-categories including carbon pricing, emissions reporting obligations, product regulation, litigation, changing customer behavior, increased cost of raw materials, technology substitution, and reputation factors, were evaluated to understand potential exposure.

We analyzed our emissions, revenue, market presence, and stakeholder priority data against the International Energy Agency (IEA) Stated Policies (STEPS), Announced Pledges (APS), and Net Zero Emissions (NZE) by 2050 scenarios for 2030, 2040, and 2050. The transition risk screening used all three IEA scenarios, with the main focus on the Net Zero scenario, as this is where the highest transition risks are expected. These scenarios provide medium- to long-term energy trend projections, allowing us to explore the potential implications of various policy choices, investment trends, and technology dynamics. The assessment assigned a baseline score for each risk reflecting current exposure, and projected future exposure using proxy indicators from the IEA for 2030, 2040, and 2050.

The NZE scenario, which aligns with global decarbonization objectives, was prioritized to inform our strategic and regulatory planning. The analysis established baseline exposure levels for integration into our broader risk-management processes and future scenario updates. At this stage, we have not conducted a specific assessment to identify assets or business activities that may be incompatible with a transition to a climate-neutral economy.

Results

Based on the physical and transition risk assessments, the following climate-related risks were identified as relevant but not material under our double materiality assessment.

• Climate-related regulations: Evolving disclosure and reporting requirements (e.g., CSRD in Europe, SB 219 in California, and Australia’s Climate-related Reporting Bill) may increase compliance costs and resource needs. Non-compliance poses potential risks, including litigation and reputational damage.
• Raw materials costs: Rising costs and reduced availability of fossil-fuel-derived inputs, driven by carbon pricing or supply disruptions, could affect procurement in the short to medium term. We mitigate these risks by maintaining multiple qualified suppliers across different regions to avoid single-source dependencies and reduce simultaneous exposure to climate events.

The following risks were identified as potentially relevant at an inherent level, where exposure to these risks was found to be higher.

• Physical (acute): Some sites are expected to experience greater extreme heat under high-warming scenarios by 2030–2050. However, due to existing HVAC systems, heat protocols, and backup generators at R&D sites, the overall operational impact is expected to remain limited.
• Physical risk (chronic): Water stress could affect certain sites in high-warming scenarios, although impacts are expected to remain low given current adaptation measures and low water dependence in office operations. Contract manufacturers are expected to bear most potential cost increases.

While we have not conducted a standalone resilience analysis, the climate risk assessment considered the effect of existing adaptation and mitigation measures (such as HVAC systems, heat protocols, backup generators, and diversified supply chains) when evaluating the likely operational impact of physical risks. These measures are expected to limit the potential disruption from acute and chronic climate hazards, and their effectiveness was qualitatively assessed following the scenario analysis.

We have applied the phase-in relief under ESRS 1 Appendix C for our second year of Sustainability Statement preparation, allowing the omission of anticipated financial effects. We may continue refining our analysis to enhance understanding of these potential risks and prepare for future disclosure requirements.

Transition Plan for Climate Change Mitigation (E1-1)

In accordance with paragraph 17 of ESRS E1-1, we have not yet developed a climate transition plan for climate change mitigation. We are monitoring regulatory developments and may adapt our approach once clearer guidance is available.

Emissions

Policies (E1-2)

We currently do not have policies linked to managing upstream or downstream emissions.

Actions (E1-3)

EV Program

We are taking steps to reduce the environmental impacts associated with our employee vehicle fleet. In Belgium, charging wall boxes are provided to employees with a company car, supporting the adoption of lower-emission vehicles. Fixed car lists have been implemented for all eligible employees, removing internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles and significantly reducing plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). This approach prioritizes electric vehicles (EVs) and reflects our longer-term plan to transition toward a fully electric fleet in Belgium, contributing to reduced fleet emissions.

Charging infrastructure constraints in other countries of operation currently limit the applicability of similar measures outside Belgium. As infrastructure becomes more accessible, we may assess opportunities to expand these actions when feasible. Emission-reduction impacts associated with fleet changes have not yet been quantified. For additional information on how employee travel and commuting contribute to our overall GHG emissions, see Section “Gross Scopes 1, 2, 3 and Total GHG emissions (E1-6)”.

Alinso Building Retrofit

We have undertaken a retrofitting program at the PolyTower offices in Ghent to improve energy efficiency and reduce operational emissions. This initiative supports our broader efforts to mitigate climate change and enhance resource efficiency across our facilities.

The retrofitting program includes the following measures:

1. HVAC System: Fossil-free system based on reversible heat pumps, managed through a building management system that adjusts ventilation rates based on CO₂ levels and occupancy.

2. Lighting: 100% LED lighting with timer or sensor-based controls.

3. Appliances: All appliances installed since 2023 have energy labels between A and C, with more efficient models introduced in 2024–2025.

Direct energy savings cannot yet be quantified because PolyTower represents an expansion rather than a replacement of existing space. A theoretical comparison indicates that expanding the Bioscape site by 3,600 m² would have resulted in approximately 30–35% higher energy costs relative to PolyTower, although this estimate is indicative only.

Targets (E1-4)

We currently do not have targets related to GHG emissions due to ongoing uncertainty regarding emissions data and evolving climate-related regulations. These regulatory developments may inform our sustainability strategy, and we continue to monitor them closely to guide our approach in this area.

Metrics

Energy Consumption and Mix (E1-5)

We do not have any biogenic emissions across our Scope 1, Scope 2, or Scope 3 categories.

Total energy consumption from fossil fuels has declined, primarily due to reductions in car-related fuel demand as the majority of the vehicle fleet in Europe, particularly in Belgium, continues to shift from diesel and petrol engines to electric vehicles.

Gross Scopes 1, 2, 3 and Total GHG emissions (E1-6)

Accounting policies

The GHG intensity is calculated as the total GHG emissions divided by total operating income. The reported figure for total operating income can be found in Section 6.1.2 “Consolidated Statements of Profit or Loss”.

We define our organizational boundaries using the Operational Control approach, as outlined in the GHG Protocol developed by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). Under this approach, we account for 100% of GHG emissions from operations under our control. Emissions from our joint venture, OncoVerity, are included in Scope 3, Category 15 – Investments.

Energy Consumption

As seen in the E1-5 metrics table, 100% of the purchased electricity, heat, steam and cooling comes from fossil sources. In 2025, there was no energy consumption purchased from renewable sources or on-site self-generated. We have revised the energy consumption calculations to only capture facilities under scope 1 and Scope 2 and subsequently restated our 2024 figures to align with this approach.

Scope 1 Emissions

Scope 1 emissions include all direct GHG emissions associated with sources owned or controlled by the Company. Our Scope 1 emissions are primarily associated with leased employee vehicles. As all sites are leased, emissions from purchased heating and cooling are classified under Scope 2, consistent with the GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance (“Identifying Scope 2 Emissions and Setting the Scope 2 Boundary”).

In 2025, vehicle fuel consumption was estimated using average daily fuel consumption from 2024. Leased vehicle data, including contract dates and fuel type, was used to calculate the number of days each vehicle was in use during 2025. This was multiplied by the corresponding 2024 average daily fuel consumption for each fuel type to estimate total fuel consumption for the year.

Scope 2 Emissions

Scope 2 emissions include indirect GHG emissions from purchased or acquired energy such as electricity, heating, and cooling, and electricity used to charge leased electric vehicles. These emissions occur at the point of generation rather than within our operations. Although we do not own or control these sources, they result from our energy consumption.

We collect invoiced utility data for properties under operational control. Where data is unavailable, consumption is estimated using floor area and energy intensity benchmarks from the Better Buildings Partnership and the World Bank. For facilities with reported data, information is obtained from landlords, utility bills, or supplier invoices. In addition, because the data collection and calculations were completed in Q4 2025, some facilities’ reported energy consumption data for Q4 was missing. The missing values were estimated using average consumption from comparable months with available data.

Electricity-related emissions are calculated by multiplying total site energy consumption by the relevant regional or country-specific emission factors. Location-based factors are sourced from the IEA, CO₂emissiefactoren, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) eGRID. As we do not currently procure renewable energy, market-based emissions reflect the residual mix where available and default to location-based factors where residuals are not available, following the GHG Protocol market-based emission factor hierarchy.

We also track the mileage for our leased electric vehicles which are charged using grid electricity. Data collection and emissions calculations for these vehicles follow a same approach to that used for vehicle fuel consumption reported under Scope 1. Emissions from the electricity used to charge leased electric vehicles are reported under Scope 2, in line with the GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance.

Emissions from heating and cooling systems (e.g., HVAC or boilers) are calculated using annual facility consumption data and emission factors from the UK Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and global warming potentials from the IPCC AR6.

Location-based emissions represent grid-average factors for the regions where we operate, while market-based emissions reflect our purchasing choices. When direct data are unavailable, estimates are based on IEA and Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) factors, with residual factors applied where available.

Scope 3 Emissions

Scope 3 emissions account for all other indirect emissions across our value chain. In line with WBCSD and GHG Protocol best practices, we engage external partners to support the development of our Scope 3 emissions inventory by collecting supplier-reported emissions data. This resulted in 48% supplier-specific data coverage, remaining consistent with 2024.

Our Scope 3 emissions include the following categories and methodologies:

• Category 1 – Purchased Goods and Services (PG&S): Includes emissions from the production of goods and services procured by argenx. A hybrid approach combines supplier-specific data which account for 57% of PG&S emissions data (compared to 55% in 2024). For the remaining spend, emissions were estimated using Environmentally Extended Input‑Output (EEIO) emission factors from the U.S. EPA Supply Chain Emission Factors, applied to cash‑based, cost‑incurred financial data. Due to limited granularity in spend categories, a supplier‑based approach was applied, with spend matched to appropriate EEIO factors using inflation‑adjusted values. In line with the principle of materiality, the inventory prioritized suppliers representing the top 90% of total spend. To allocate emissions between Category 1 (Purchased Goods and Services) and Category 4 (Upstream Transportation and Distribution), historical proxy percentages from the FY24 spend report were used.
• Category 2 – Capital Goods: Includes upstream (cradle-to-gate) emissions from the production of capital goods purchased or acquired during the reporting year. Emissions are calculated using a spend-based EEIO analysis, applying EPA Supply Chain Emission Factors and financial data.
• Category 3 – Fuel- and Energy-Related Activities Not Included in Scope 1 or 2: Represents upstream emissions from fuels and energy used in Scopes 1 and 2, calculated using an average-data approach. Calculations are based on Scope 1 and 2 consumption, with fuel factors from DEFRA and electricity factors sourced from the IEA and country-specific sources where available.
• Category 4 – Upstream Transportation and Distribution: Calculated on a well-to-wheel (WTW) basis in alignment with the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), covering the extraction, refinement, distribution, and combustion of fuels. Supplier‑specific emissions data were applied where available, representing approximately 6% of total Category 4 emissions (down from 14% in 2024). Where supplier data were unavailable, emissions were estimated using distance‑based calculations with DEFRA emission factors, and spend‑based estimates using U.S. EPA Supply Chain Emission Factors where distance data could not be obtained. Spend‑based calculations were derived from cost‑incurred financial data. Consistent with the FY24 GHG inventory, assumptions were made that pallet weights and Biocair transportation lane distances remained unchanged.
• Category 6 – Business Travel: Includes air, rail, car, and other business travel (e.g., ride-share, rental, taxi), calculated on a WTW basis using distance- or spend-based data in alignment with the SBTi. Emissions from hotel stays, while optional under the GHG Protocol, have been included using a spend-based approach which relies upon our cash-out financial data as the underlying source for these calculations. Air-travel data are exported from Business Travel Insights, categorizing flights by haul length (short, medium, long) and cabin class; distances are multiplied by DEFRA well-to-tank (WTT) and tank-to-wheel (TTW) emission factors.
• Category 7 – Employee Commute and Work from Home (WFH): Employee commute emissions are calculated using a distance-based methodology based on employee location and regional transport patterns, on a WTW basis in alignment with the SBTi and applying DEFRA emission factors. Emissions from teleworking (work from home), while optional under the GHG Protocol, have been included by estimating the incremental increase in household energy use and remote-work frequency. Emissions from leased commuting vehicles are excluded to avoid double counting with Scope 1.
• Category 8 – Upstream Leased Assets: Includes shared workspaces; emissions are calculated consistent with Scopes 1 and 2 methodologies, using actual activity data where available and estimates otherwise. Emission factors are primarily sourced from the IEA and DEFRA, with residual factors used for market-based calculations where available.
• Category 9 – Downstream Transportation and Distribution: Represents outbound transportation not paid for by us, calculated on a distance-based WTW basis in alignment with the SBTi and using DEFRA emission factors.
• Category 14 – Franchises: Reflects the license granted to Zai Lab to sell and distribute VYVGART in China in return for sales-based royalties and a one-time milestone payment. Emissions are calculated using the franchise-specific method, based on Zai Lab’s Scope 1 and 2 data allocated to us.
• Category 15 – Investments: Includes emissions from the OncoVerity joint venture (calculated using the average-data method and EPA Supply Chain Emission Factors) and Zai Lab (calculated using the investment-specific method).

The following categories have been excluded:

• Category 5 – Waste: Not relevant; our emissions related to waste is minimal.
• Category 10 – Processing of Sold Products: Not applicable; we do not sell intermediate products.
• Category 11 – Use of Sold Products: Not applicable; our products do not consume energy.
• Category 12 – End of Life Treatment of Sold Products: Not relevant; our emissions related to the disposal of sold products is minimal.
• Category 13 – Downstream Leased Assets: Not applicable; we do not lease assets to other entities.

EU Taxonomy

Introduction to the EU Taxonomy Regulation

The EU Taxonomy is a classification system for environmentally sustainable economic activities. It provides a common framework for determining when an activity contributes substantially to one or more environmental objectives, does no significant harm to others, and complies with minimum social safeguards. By defining these technical screening criteria, the Taxonomy aims to direct investments into sustainable activities, increase transparency and improve comparability.

The EU Taxonomy Regulation identifies six environmental objectives:

1. Climate change mitigation

2. Climate change adaptation

3. Sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources

4. Transition to a circular economy

5. Pollution prevention and control

6. Protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems

As a non-financial undertaking, argenx is required to disclose the proportion of its turnover, capital expenditure (CapEx) and operational expenditure (OpEx) associated with Taxonomy-eligible or Taxonomy-aligned economic activities listed under these six objectives.

The methodology applied has remained consistent with the previous reporting period, ensuring comparability and continuity across reporting periods. In 2025, argenx closely monitored the development of the Omnibus Delegated Act, which simplifies the EU Taxonomy Regulation and entered into force on 28 January 2026. Although the Delegated Act applies retrospectively from 1 January 2026, Article 4 provides a transitional option allowing reporting undertakings to continue applying the earlier reporting rules for the 2025 financial year. For the purposes of this report, argenx has exercised this transitional option and will adopt the amended rules in the next reporting period.

Eligibility and Alignment

Eligibility

In 2025, we reviewed our activities against the economic activities listed under the six environmental objectives covered by the Climate, Environmental and Complementary Climate Delegated Acts. Potential eligible activities were identified through an initial screening process of all activities and finalized based on the activity descriptions in the Delegated Acts. There were no notable changes in our assessment from the previous financial year.

Two eligible activities were identified as relevant:

• 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products (Pollution prevention and control)
• 6.5. Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and light commercial vehicles (Climate Change Mitigation).

These correspond to our turnover derived from sales of medicinal products and R&D activities (associated with activity 1.2), and to vehicle leases (associated with activity 6.5).

Alignment

The Taxonomy assessment was conducted in collaboration with legal, financial, and internal ESG experts, with additional support from external specialists.

The Minimum Safeguards establish criteria to ensure entities carrying out environmentally sustainable activities labeled as Taxonomy-aligned meet certain social and governance standards. These criteria are centered around four key themes: human rights, corruption, taxation and fair competition. We conducted a thorough assessment of whether it meets the Minimum Safeguards criteria as laid out in the Final Report on Minimum Safeguards published by the EU platform on Sustainable Finance in October 2022.

We are considered compliant with criteria related to corruption, taxation, and fair competition through our Global Tax Policy and Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, which covers human rights, anti-corruption, and bribery as well as fair competition. No breaches of the Minimum Safeguards were identified.

We remain committed to respecting human rights and working with partners who share this commitment. However, we have not yet implemented a formal Human Rights Due Diligence process fully aligned with the six-step approach outlined in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and the OECD Guidelines, as required by the Minimum Safeguards criteria.

Based on this outcome, full alignment with Taxonomy requirements for turnover and OpEx associated with activity 1.2 (Manufacture of medicinal products), and CapEx associated with activity 6.5 (Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and light commercial vehicles) could not be demonstrated at this time.

Accordingly, we have reported zero percent alignment for turnover and OpEx KPIs.

Accounting Policies

Turnover

Turnover consists of net turnover derived from products or services.

In line with our revised approach to assessing taxonomy eligibility for turnover during the previous financial year, contract manufacturing is included in the KPI calculation. Revenue from sales of the manufactured products (arising from the economic activity 1.2.) is considered eligible. We fully recognizes the revenue under the principles set out in IFRS 15, and therefore, all product net sales are considered eligible under activity 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products.

Numerator: Consists of the external product net sales (associated with activity 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products) and totals $4.2 billion.

Denominator: Consists of product net sales and collaboration revenue (as listed in Annex I, point 1.1.1 of Disclosures Delegated Act), and totals $4.2 billion. Refer to “Note 16 Segment Reporting” and “Note 15 Other Operating Income” in the consolidated financial statements.

CapEx

CapEx covers additions to tangible and intangible assets including right-of-use assets during the fiscal year considered before depreciation, amortization, and any re-measurements.

We have considered leased vehicles that result in the recognition of a right-of-use of asset and are recognized under IFRS 16 Leases as eligible CapEx per the definition in Taxonomy Disclosures Delegated Act. All leased vehicles are considered eligible under 6.5. Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and light commercial vehicles.

Numerator: Additions to leased vehicles (associated with activity 6.5. Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and light commercial vehicles), totaling $10.4 million.

Denominator: Additions to tangible and intangible assets during the fiscal year (as listed in Annex I, point 1.1.2.1 of Disclosures Delegated Act), totaling $132.7 million.

Refer to “Note 4 Property, Plant and Equipment” and “Note 5 Intangible Assets” in the consolidated financial statements.

OpEx

OpEx covers direct non-capitalized costs related to research and development, building renovation measures, short-term lease, maintenance and repair, and any other direct expenditures relating to the day-to-day servicing of assets of property, plant, and equipment.

We considered direct costs related to research and development associated with activity 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products as eligible OpEx. Research and development are a key activity in our strategic business model and value chain. It consists of multi-phase clinical trials, regulatory approval processes, research of pre-clinical stage product candidates, and discovery stage programs, all with the eventual goal to manufacture medicinal products and treat patients globally. Please refer to “Note 17 Research and Development Expenses” for eligible R&D expenses.

For 2025, specifically, R&D related to evaluating the use of efgartigimod in 15 severe autoimmune diseases (including MG, CIDP, and ITP), empasiprubart is currently being evaluated in four diseases, proof-of-concept clinical trials in adimanebart, and other pre-clinical research, was considered eligible OpEx.

Numerator: Direct R&D expenses related to efgartigimod and other pre-clinical candidates (associated with activity 1.2. Manufacture of medicinal products) totaling $859.2 million.

Denominator: R&D, maintenance, and repair (as listed in Annex I, point 1.1.3.1 of Disclosures Delegated Act), totaling $861.4 million.

For the denominator, refer to “Note 17 Research and Development Expenses” and “Note 18 Selling, General and Administrative Expenses” in the consolidated financial statements.

Double counting is avoided as none of the eligible activities contribute to multiple environmental objectives and each KPI includes only one eligible activity.

Changes From the Previous Reporting Period

We reviewed the taxonomy-eligibility and alignment of our economic activities under all six environmental objectives. No notable changes were identified compared to the previous fiscal year.