Read time: 10 minutes
Welcome back to The Ruck Filter.
On Tuesday the US extended its tariffs on patented medicines, up to 100%, to every remaining maker of branded drugs. The 26 companies that had signed pricing deals with the White House, together 89% of the US branded market, qualify for a zero rate until 20 January 2029. After the US close on Thursday, Nike reported that its sales in China had fallen by a quarter at constant currency, in a market where Adidas is growing at double-digit rates. And in Germany, Deutsche Bank and Trade Republic named their prices for a pension depot that launches in January, while a bill now before the Bundestag names the fund manager for every child whose parents don’t pick one. It’s the Bundesbank.
Three stories about one question: who gets to be the default, and who pays for it. Each of the three sections now ends with a concrete instrument idea. After them come a new standing box on insider buying and a short check of last week’s watch list.
1. Signal vs. Noise: A Tariff That Sorts by Size 💊
The Noise: Trump’s 100% drug tariff hits European pharma.
The Alpha: Europe’s largest drugmakers pay nothing. The schedule that took effect on Tuesday sorts companies by size rather than by country, and the companies with a zero rate paid for it in prices instead of duty.
The Filter: The first phase started on 31 July and covered the 17 companies that received the White House’s pricing letters in July 2025; all of them had signed by the end of April. The second phase took effect on 29 September and reaches every other maker of branded drugs (Managed Healthcare Executive). Patented drugs and their active ingredients face up to 100%. An approved US manufacturing plan brings that down to 20%, rising to 100% in April 2030, and a plan plus a most-favoured-nation pricing deal brings it to zero until 20 January 2029. Products from the EU, Switzerland, Japan, South Korea and Liechtenstein are capped at 15%. Generics, biosimilars, orphan drugs, cell and gene therapies and antibody-drug conjugates are exempt. Nine more companies signed on 31 August, among them UCB, Teva and Alcon, bringing the total to 26 manufacturers and 89% of the US branded market (Gibson Dunn). Axios counts more than 100 firms whose products now carry duty and which lack the means to move production quickly.
The DACH map is short. Roche through Genentech, Novartis, Merck KGaA through EMD Serono and the privately held Boehringer Ingelheim were among the original 17. Alcon joined in August. Bayer “was not initially invited to the table,” Reuters reported in April. On 31 August Reuters, citing the Financial Times, named it among the companies expected to sign; it wasn’t among the nine published that day, and I couldn’t confirm an agreement since.
What the zero costs. The deals require Medicaid prices comparable to Europe’s, sales through the TrumpRx portal, and new US launches priced in line with Europe and other rich countries (AJMC). The tariff works as a pricing instrument, so for the zero club the number to watch is what price parity does to US margins. The launch clause also ties US prices to European ones. Arithmetically, a signer protects its US price by pricing higher in Europe or launching there later. Germany, where a new drug’s price is negotiated nationally after launch, has just become an input into someone else’s price.
Where the exposure sits. In the iShares STOXX Europe 600 Health Care ETF, Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, GSK and Sanofi make up about 62% of holdings (fund data via Lightyear). All six qualify for the zero rate. At index level Tuesday’s tariff barely registers before 2029. What exposure there is sits outside those six: mid-caps without a deal, and contract manufacturers whose active ingredients are covered.
The takeover arithmetic. A mid-cap without a deal that ships patented drugs from Europe pays up to 15% on the customs value of its imports. Marta Wosińska of Brookings told Axios that for companies without US plants “the easier thing might be to merge [with a big drugmaker] or sell the product.” Before paying a takeover premium for that, I’d want to read one clause: whether a signer’s zero rate extends to products it acquires. The published summaries don’t say.
Both dates bracket the next presidential election. The tariff on imported generics, announced in July, starts at 100% on 1 August 2028, three months before the vote, and rises to 200% a year later (AJMC). The zero rate ends on 20 January 2029, Inauguration Day. Anyone valuing the exemption beyond that date is betting on the next administration.
A measured approach:
Sort pharma holdings by deal status before domicile. A Swiss signer imports at zero; a US biotech without a deal that makes its drug in Ireland pays 15%. What to watch: third-quarter commentary from the large signers, from late October, on what Medicaid price parity costs them.
Filter Idea: the cap-weighted STOXX Europe 600 Health Care (e.g. iShares EXV4) over small and mid-cap pharma baskets
Thesis: about 62% of the fund sits in six names with a zero rate until 20 January 2029. The tariff risk concentrates in what the cap-weighted index underweights.
What would prove me wrong: price-parity terms costing the large signers more margin than the tariff would have.
Main risk: concentration, with Roche, Novartis and AstraZeneca alone at well over 40%, and a cliff in January 2029.
Filter Idea: Sandoz (SDZ), an exemption with an expiry date
Thesis: Sandoz’s generics and biosimilars are tariff-free today. The generics tariff starts on 1 August 2028, and the July announcement left open whether biosimilars fall under it. Sandoz makes about 22% of its sales in North America and has no US production (AWP via cash.ch, July). On 8 September it announced its next $300 million biosimilar plant: in Ljubljana, operating from 2029. In August the shares traded at about 21 times forward earnings, a 30% premium to the sector (cash.ch). That valuation prices biosimilar growth with no tariff discount. I wouldn’t pay a premium for the exemption until there is a US plant or an explicit carve-out for biosimilars.
What would prove me wrong: a US manufacturing commitment, or biosimilars written out of the 2028 tariff.
Main risk to this view: biosimilars, 33% of first-half sales and up 25% in dollars, may simply outgrow the question.
2. Nike Lost China. Adidas Didn’t. 👟
The Noise: Nike’s miss is a warning for the whole sportswear sector.
The Alpha: Chinese shoppers are walking away from one brand. Adidas grew 15% in China in its second quarter, while Nike’s China sales fell 26% at constant currency from June to August. The market still trades the two as a single sector, and the tariff refund Adidas left out of its guidance is a second thing the share price ignores.
The Filter: Nike’s fiscal first quarter, reported on Thursday: revenue of $11.21 billion, down 4% and below consensus. Greater China came in at $1.18 billion, down 22% reported and 26% at constant currency, with China EBIT down 34% (StockTitan); in the previous quarter the currency-neutral decline had been 17%. For the year Nike guides to revenue down by a high single-digit percentage and adjusted EPS of $1.15 to $1.35, against a consensus of $1.61 to $1.67 depending on the source. Management said cuts to oversupplied product in Jordan, sportswear and Greater China would weigh “into 2028” (Motley Fool). The shares fell about 6% on Friday. By the figures StockTitan and Börse Express cite, Nike now holds 20.7% of China’s sportswear market and Anta 23%. On 1 January Nike stops selling online through Topsports and Pou Sheng, two long-standing Chinese retail partners.
Adidas reported the other side in July. Currency-neutral revenue rose 14% in the second quarter, Greater China 15% on “continued strong market share gains,” and full-year sales guidance went up to 9–10%. Operating profit rose only 5% to €574 million, with marketing €212 million higher because of the World Cup; the €2.3 billion target for the year stayed. The shares went from about €180 in late July to about €147 in late September. By midday on Friday, with Nike down 6.6%, Adidas’s US listing was up 0.8% (Yahoo Finance).
Same market, opposite direction. Nike’s quarter runs June to August and Adidas’s April to June, so they overlap by one month and the comparison is imperfect. Still, the gap is about 40 points. Nike’s repair job shrinks its Chinese sales before it restores them, because clearing oversupply and pulling the online business from big partners both cut reported revenue first. I’d expect the share shift to continue into 2027.
For Adidas, refund season starts on 29 October. On 20 February the Supreme Court struck down the emergency tariffs imposed under IEEPA, and importers are getting the money back. Nike booked a $986 million refund in its fiscal fourth quarter. Adidas received a first small refund in the second quarter and says “potential refunds in an amount of between US$ 250 million and US$ 300 million … are not reflected in the company’s full-year guidance.” That is roughly a tenth of its operating profit target. WirtschaftsWoche counted more than €790 million for listed German companies by August, led by DHL with €416 million; Puma has received €49 million. From late October, reported numbers will mix operations with refunds, and a beat that rests on a refund tells you nothing about the business.
A measured approach:
Read Nike’s China slide as a share shift until Chinese data say otherwise. What to watch: Nike’s investor day on 16 and 17 November, and whether it puts a date on China.
Filter Idea: Adidas (ADS)
Thesis: share gains in China while Nike’s business there shrinks by a quarter; shares down about a fifth since a second-quarter margin miss, driven partly by World Cup marketing that won’t recur in that form; $250–300 million of possible refunds outside guidance. The third-quarter report on 29 October tests all of it.
What would prove me wrong: China growth slowing to single digits, or marketing spend staying high after the tournament.
Main risk: 2027. There is no World Cup, Nike takes over Germany’s national team kit next year in a deal reported at around €100 million a year, and Nike may buy back share in China with price.
3. Germany Gives Away the Pension Depot 🏦
The Noise: The price war over Germany’s new pension depot is good news for savers.
The Alpha: Savers win while the promotions last: two years at Deutsche Bank, five at flatexDEGIRO. After that the law lets providers raise prices on four months’ notice. Single stocks are banned, so the subsidy flows into funds, and the cheapest offers are built on global indices that are three-quarters American. For children whose parents don’t pick a provider, the state has already picked one: the Bundesbank.
The Filter: The Altersvorsorgedepot starts on 1 January 2027. The state adds up to €540 a year (50% on the first €360 paid in, 25% up to €1,800) plus €300 per child. The standard product pairs a low-risk fund (risk class 1–2) with a growth fund (3–5) and carries a 1% annual cost cap, the only variant with one. Single stocks, certificates and crypto are excluded.
This week the pricing started in earnest. On Monday Deutsche Bank and DWS priced their digital standard depot at 0.10% a year for two years, then 0.28%, and the depot with advice at 0.99%, alongside two insurance variants from Zurich. Deka charges 0.1% and Scalable at most 0.15%. On Thursday Trade Republic named 0.00% custody and about 50 ETFs at launch, so far reported by a single source (aktienrenterechner.de). A week earlier flatexDEGIRO had announced no fees and a full refund of fund costs for five years, then 0.07% at most. Only one German in five over the age of 14 holds stocks, funds, bonds or ETFs at all (fundresearch).
One bank, two prices. For the first two years advice costs ten times the app, after that three and a half times. On a €20,000 depot the gap is €178 a year at first and €142 from year three. The 0.99% sits one basis point below the 1% cap that applies to standard products.
Free no longer comes from order flow. Germany’s exemption from the EU ban on payment for order flow expired on 30 June. The neobrokers are giving depots away three months after losing the payments that financed free trading, so the money has to come from cash balances, cross-selling and that four-month notice clause.
The subsidy buys America. With single stocks banned, the money goes into funds, and the obvious one is the MSCI World: 71.9% US at the end of April, with France fifth at 2.5% and Germany below that. Of a full €540 subsidy placed in that index, about €388 buys American shares and less than €14 German ones. The DAX gets no pension bid. Fund managers, custodians and exchanges get paid either way.
For children, the default is the Bundesbank. The Frühstartrente pays €10 a month for every child aged six to 18, starting with those born in 2020. If the parents open no contract, the money goes into a federal special fund from 1 January 2028: “Die Verwaltung der Mittel des Sondervermögens wird der Deutschen Bundesbank übertragen,” and it is to be invested “global diversifiziert” (Drucksache 21/7864). The budget lines, €198 million for 2027 and €411 million for 2030, imply about 1.65 million and 3.4 million children at €120 a year each. In the first reading the Left called the scheme “private Kundenakquise auf Staatskosten.” For the youngest savers, the alternative to every provider’s offer is the central bank.
A measured approach:
Own the toll collectors rather than hoping for a DAX bid. What to watch: product certification this autumn, and which providers publish the price that follows the promotion.
Filter Idea: DWS Group (DWS)
Thesis: the only listed German asset manager that sells both price tiers through its parent’s network, with Xtrackers as the product factory. S&P Global estimates €26–56 billion a year of additional net inflows 12 to 24 months after the reform starts; DWS took in €35.8 billion in the first half alone. At €75.80 in August the shares traded at 13.5 times 2027 earnings (Börsen-Zeitung); at September’s record of €78.75 that is about 14 times.
What would prove me wrong: the advice tier failing to sell while the digital tier slides toward zero.
Main risk: fee margin. Second-quarter profit fell from the first quarter despite record assets, on higher costs.
Filter Idea: short-dated EU-Bonds
Thesis: euro safe-asset yield without a single government’s budget attached. At Monday’s auction the EU sold bonds due December 2029 at 3.613% and December 2035 at 4.003% (European Commission). On Tuesday the Bundesbank put nine- to ten-year Bunds at 3.62% and three- to five-year Bunds at 3.38%. That is close to 40 basis points at ten years, OMFIF’s 2025 average, and more than 20 at the short end. In the same week the French-German ten-year spread passed 130 basis points, the widest since 2012, and Italy’s reached about 106. If I had to fill the low-risk leg the depot law prescribes, or its institutional equivalent, I’d take that premium at the short end, where duration risk is smallest.
What would prove me wrong: EU spreads widening in step with France’s.
Main risk: supply and the ECB. Monday’s 2029 line drew a bid-to-cover of only 1.10, EU debt is heading for €1 trillion (OMFIF), and markets price a 2.81% deposit rate by December.
🔎 Insider Radar
Under the EU’s market abuse rules, managers report their own trades within three business days. The filings show where management puts its own money. They don’t say why, and a purchase isn’t a forecast. This box reports; it doesn’t recommend.
Rheinmetall. On Tuesday CEO Armin Papperger bought 525 shares at an average €950.38, €498,948 in total. In late June his holding company ATP Holding had bought €3.04 million worth at about €955. Same price three months apart, with the shares close to 39% below where they started the year. On Friday Rheinmetall also published a purchase by the Sara Georgi Stiftung. In the background, The Atlantic reports US plans for talks in Abu Dhabi in October on a limited ceasefire, and Ukrainian officials don’t expect serious Russian negotiation before spring.
flatexDEGIRO. On 25 September Ditandus GmbH, linked to Benon Janos, bought shares for €254,747 at about €29.97. That was the day Janos was appointed CEO alongside Oliver Behrens, and the day after the company announced its free pension depot.
🔁 Last Week’s Watch List
✅ Rates. Core PCE came in at 3.0% for August, “much lighter than expected” (CNBC). September payrolls rose 29,000, unemployment rose to 4.2%, and revisions took a combined 60,000 off July and August. A week ago futures put about 70% on an October hike; after Friday’s report CME FedWatch showed about 77% for no change.
✅ Long end. On Thursday dealers offered $46.39 billion of 10- to 20-year debt and the Treasury bought $6 billion (Reuters), which fits last week’s correction: it buys only what it considers cheap. No backstop appeared. The 30-year par yield closed at 5.64% on Wednesday and 5.63% on Friday, up from 5.49%.
✅ Diesel. No export ban. The G7 agreed to release up to 100 million barrels over four months via the IEA, with diesel front-loaded in the first 20 days, and Trump hailed the deal.
⏳ BASF–Evonik. Evonik rejected an indicative €22.15 a share, about €10.3 billion. The structure wasn’t disclosed, so my cash-or-shares question stays open.
⏳ Muse. I found no EU launch date and no change to Amazon’s block.
Outro: Who Sets the Default
The tariff schedule, China’s sportswear shelves and Germany’s pension law answered the same question this week: what happens to whoever doesn’t choose. In pharma the answer is a duty of up to 100%, or 15% from Europe. For German children it’s the Bundesbank. In China the habit that made Nike the default has broken, and Anta and Adidas are collecting what it was worth.
Defaults look neutral. Somebody set each of them, and the cost usually lands on someone who never sees the bill.
The Takeaway: Twenty-six drugmakers bought a zero tariff with their prices. Which of your holdings is paying for a default it didn’t choose, and which one is collecting?
Daniel Ruck
Editor, The Ruck Filter
Filter Sources this week
Managed Healthcare Executive — Section 232 phase two for branded drugs, September 29, 2026
Drug Discovery Trends — tariffs reach smaller drugmakers, September 29, 2026
Axios — drug tariffs and smaller biotechs, Marta Wosińska quote, September 30, 2026
Gibson Dunn — nine new pricing agreements, 26 manufacturers and 89% of the branded market, September 1, 2026
AJMC — terms of the pricing agreements, December 19, 2025; generic-drug tariff timeline, July 22, 2026
Reuters (via WDEZ and Yahoo Finance) — Bayer not initially invited, April 7, 2026; companies expected to sign, August 31, 2026
Lightyear — iShares STOXX Europe 600 Health Care holdings
cash.ch / AWP — Sandoz North America share, no US production, July 22, 2026; Sandoz valuation, August 20, 2026
Bilanz — Sandoz Capital Markets Day and Ljubljana plant, September 8, 2026
RTTNews — Sandoz first-half 2026 results, August 5, 2026
SEC — Nike Form 10-Q, quarter ended August 31, 2026
StockTitan — Nike Q1 FY2027 results, guidance, China and tariff refund, October 1–2, 2026
Motley Fool — Nike guidance and supply cuts, October 2, 2026
Yahoo Finance — sportswear stocks after Nike’s report, October 2, 2026
Börse Express — Nike Q4 FY2026 China decline, July 1, 2026; Topsports and Pou Sheng exit, July 26, 2026; Adidas and the DFB contract, July 22, 2026
adidas AG (ad hoc release) — Q2 2026 results and refund disclosure, July 30, 2026
MarketScreener — adidas closing prices and Q3 date
Milbank — Supreme Court ruling in Learning Resources v. Trump, February 20, 2026
Börsen-Zeitung — progress on IEEPA refunds, July 31, 2026
WirtschaftsWoche (via leinetal24) — IEEPA refunds of German companies, August 22, 2026
fundresearch — Altersvorsorgedepot price war, September 28, 2026
goldesel — Deutsche Bank, DWS and Zurich offer, September 28, 2026
aktienrenterechner.de — Trade Republic conditions, October 1, 2026
stock3 — flatexDEGIRO offer, September 24, 2026; legal framework of the Altersvorsorgedepot, March 25, 2026
extraETF — permitted assets and standard product rules, August 2026
broker-test.at — EU ban on payment for order flow and Germany’s exemption
Finanztip — MSCI World country weights, April 30, 2026
Deutscher Bundestag — Drucksache 21/7864 (Frühstartrente), September 7, 2026; first reading, September 25, 2026
Börsen-Zeitung — DWS and the pension reform, S&P Global estimate, August 6, 2026; DWS half-year results, July 29, 2026
leinetal24 — DWS record high, September 14, 2026
OMFIF — EU bonds versus Bunds, January 13, 2026
European Commission — EU-Bonds auction results, September 28, 2026
Deutsche Bundesbank — daily yields of Federal securities, September 29, 2026
Eurasia Business News — euro-area spreads, October 1, 2026
EQS-DD — Rheinmetall (Armin Papperger), September 29, 2026; flatexDEGIRO (Ditandus GmbH), September 25, 2026
Rheinmetall — managers’ transactions
Börse Express — Rheinmetall insider purchases, June 27, 2026; goldesel — Rheinmetall share performance, June 25, 2026
EQS ad hoc — flatexDEGIRO management board, September 25, 2026
Censor.NET (citing The Atlantic) — planned Abu Dhabi talks, September 29, 2026
CNBC — September jobs report, October 2, 2026; August PCE, September 30, 2026
Babypips — CME FedWatch after payrolls, October 2, 2026
Reuters (via TradingView) — Treasury buyback results, October 1, 2026
US Department of the Treasury — daily par yield curve rates
Al Jazeera — G7 oil stock release, October 2, 2026
Kapitalmarktexperten — Evonik rejects BASF proposal, September 29, 2026
Disclaimer: The Ruck Filter is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or tax advice. The information provided is based on data available at the time of writing and is subject to change. Investing in financial markets involves risks, including the potential loss of principal. Every reader is solely responsible for their own trading and investment decisions. Please conduct your own due diligence or consult with a licensed professional before making any financial commitments. Companies with potential conflicts of interest are excluded from coverage as a matter of editorial policy.