Royalty Pharma plc

The following table reports the compensation of our CEO who is our principal executive officer and the average compensation of the other named executive officers (“Non-CEO NEOs”) as reported in the “Summary Compensation Table” as well as their “compensation actually paid” as calculated pursuant to SEC rules and certain financial performance measures required by such rules.

On May 16, 2025, we completed the Internalization and evolved from an externally managed structure into an integrated company. Our CEO, Mr. Legorreta, and the other named executive officers became our employees.

Column (b). Prior to the Internalization, Mr. Legorreta was the sole owner of our former external manager and entitled to all of its profits. See “Profits of our Former External Manager” above for a discussion of the compensation of our CEO, Mr. Legorreta, for the respective years shown and for profits of our former external manager to which Mr. Legorreta was entitled. Amounts shown in column (b) do not include the following profits of our former external manager received by Mr. Legorreta: $43,081,842, $31,190,909, $84,837,077, $93,478,402 and $49,513,461 for 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively.

Column (c). “Compensation actually paid” to our CEO reflects the amounts in column (b), adjusted as set forth in the table below, as determined in accordance with SEC rules. The dollar amounts reflected in column (c) of the table above do not reflect the actual amount of compensation earned by or paid to our CEO during the applicable year. Further, the increase in the dollar amounts between columns (b) and (c) in the table above represents the year-over-year changes in the aggregate net present value (“NPV”) of outstanding Equity Performance Awards. For additional information regarding Equity Performance Awards, see “Equity Performance Awards” above.

As we consider Equity Performance Awards to have a fair value ofzero as of the date of grant, no adjustments were necessary to deduct the grant date fair value of Equity Performance Awards from the Total Compensation reported in the Summary Compensation Table for any applicable year. There wereno Equity Performance Awards which were granted and became payable in the same year and no dividends or other earnings paid on Equity Performance Awards in the covered fiscal year prior to the vesting date that are not otherwise included in the total compensation for the covered fiscal year. In addition, as our CEO does not receive pension benefits, no adjustments were required with respect thereto.

PAY VERSUS PERFORMANCE

Column (d). The following Non-CEO named executive officers are included in the average figures shown:

2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025: Terrance Coyne, Christopher Hite, George Lloyd and Marshall Urist, M.D., Ph.D. Effective December 31, 2025, Mr. Lloyd transitioned from his role as Executive Vice President, Investments & Chief Legal Officer to Senior Advisor.

See “Profits of our Former External Manager” above for profits of our former external manager received by our Non-CEO NEOs in each year. The amounts shown in column (d) do not include profits of our former external manager of $1,782,183, $1,260,000, $1,200,000, $1,150,000 and $1,050,000 for 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively.

Column (e). Average “compensation actually paid” for our Non-CEO NEOs reflects the amounts in column (d) of the table above, adjusted as set forth in the table below, as determined in accordance with SEC rules. See “Profits of our Former External Manager” above for profits of former external manager received by each of our Non-CEO NEOs. Amounts shown in column (e) do not include profits of our former external manager of $1,782,183, $1,260,000, $1,200,000, $1,150,000 and $1,050,000 for 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively. The dollar amounts reflected in column (e) of the table above do not reflect the actual amount of compensation earned by or paid to our Non-CEO NEOs during the applicable year. Further, the increase in the dollar amounts between columns (d) and (e) in the table above represents the year over year changes in the average salaries, bonuses, aggregate net present value (“NPV”) of Equity Performance Awards. For additional information regarding Equity Performance Awards, see “Equity Performance Awards” above.

The same adjustment methodology and assumptions described above for the CEO apply to Non-CEO NEOs.

Column (f). Represents our cumulative total shareholder return (“TSR”) for the measurement periods beginning on the first trading day of 2021 and ending on December 31 of each respective year.

Column (g). Represents the cumulative TSR of our Biopharmaceutical and Capital Allocator Peer Groups as described above in “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” for the measurement periods beginning on the first trading day of 2021 and ending on December 31 of each respective year. The peer group used in the prior year included our Biopharmaceutical Peer Group as well as Blackstone (BX), Apollo (APO), Jefferies (JEF), T. Rowe Price (TROW), Ares (ARES), Affiliated Managers Group (AMG), Carlyle (CG), Invesco (IVZ) and Lazard (LAZ) (which comprised our prior year Capital Allocator Peer Group) and the total TSR for 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025, based on the value of an initial fixed investment of $100 was $127.22, $140.50, $149.97, $166.01 and $202.81, respectively. The peer group change was made for the disclosure in this year’s proxy statement because we believe that the compensation peer group provides a more accurate benchmark for performance compared to the previously used peer group.

Column (h). Reflects “Consolidated Net Income” in our Consolidated Statements of Operations included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K.

As the largest buyer of biopharmaceutical royalties and a leading funder of innovation across the biopharmaceutical industry, our revenue is comprised mostly of income from royalty assets. Consequently, we did not use net income as a performance measure because we classify most royalty assets that we acquire as financial assets that are measured at amortized cost using the prospective effective interest method which can be volatile and unpredictable. We do not believe the relationship between our net income and compensation actually paid to our NEOs during the periods presented is a key metric for our investors.

Column (i). Our Company-selected Measure is Portfolio Receipts Change which is described below.

Columns (j) and (k). We have also presented two additional financial measures—SG&A as % of Portfolio Receipts and Adjusted EBITDA Margin because they illustrate how compensation actually paid to our NEOs results in much lower SG&A versus our peers. Refer to the section “Appendix A— Reconciliations of Non-GAAP Measures” of this Proxy Statement for reconciliations of non-GAAP measures to their corresponding GAAP measure.

PAY VERSUS PERFORMANCE

Portfolio Receipts Change was chosen from the following four most important financial measures used by our Management Development and Compensation Committee to compare compensation actually paid to the CEO and Non-CEO NEOs to our performance. The other measures in this table are not ranked. Portfolio Receipts Change and the other financial measures listed in the chart below reflect the financial measures utilized by, and reflect the decision of our Management Development and Compensation Committee.

See our Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional discussion on Portfolio Receipts, Adjusted EBITDA and Portfolio Cash Flow. In the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” section of this Proxy Statement, we provide greater detail on our elements of compensation and the compensation philosophy.

PAY VERSUS PERFORMANCE

Relationship Between Compensation Actually Paid and Performance Measures

The relationships described below must be understood in the context of our Internalization, which changed our compensation oversight and structure. Prior to the Internalization, our named executive officers were employed and compensated by our former external manager, rather than by Royalty Pharma. Our named executive officers were also entitled to a share of the profits of our former external manager that are described above. The Management Development and Compensation Committee did not set executive compensation prior to the Internalization. Following the Internalization, our named executive officers became employees and the Management Development and Compensation Committee has oversight over executive compensation.

Additionally, our compensation philosophy emphasizes long-term performance and value creation. Accordingly, we do not seek to align “compensation actually paid” as calculated under SEC rules for a specific year with single-year performance metrics. The year-over-year changes in “compensation actually paid” primarily reflect fluctuations in the net present value of Equity Performance Awards, rather than annual compensation decisions.

In accordance with Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K, we are providing the following descriptions of the relationships between information presented in the Pay versus Performance table.

PAY VERSUS PERFORMANCE

PAY VERSUS PERFORMANCE

Relationship Between Compensation Actually Paid and Supplemental Performance Measures

Consistent with our long-term performance focus, we are providing the following supplemental performance measures that reflect our operational efficiency and our performance-driven compensation philosophy.