WGS: What's Influencing The Shift to Genome, Has That Timeline Changed, and Where We Think This All Shakes Out (KOL Diligence & Management Conversations)

Research evidence excerpt

WGS: What's Influencing The Shift to Genome, Has That Timeline Changed, and Where We Think This All Shakes Out (KOL Diligence & Management Conversations)

Diagnostics & Life Sciences Tools June 22, 2026

Subbu Nambi, Ph.D.

subbu.nambi@guggenheimpartners.com WGS: What's Influencing The Shift to Genome,

617 874 7383 Has That Timeline Changed, and Where We Think Thomas VonDerVellen

thomas.vondervellen@guggenheimpartners.com This All Shakes Out (KOL Diligence & Management

617 859 4657

Conversations) Ricki Levitus

ricki.levitus@guggenheimpartners.com

212 823 6556 Key Message: We conducted KOL checks with geneticists and pediatric specialists to

stress-test WGS's 1Q26 assumption of static exome/genome mix for the rest of the

year, alongside separate competitive checks with key decision makers across academic

hospitals, large health systems, and pediatric-specialty hospitals to assess rare disease

testing share dynamics. We also met with management from both WGS and Baylor

Genetics. Our conclusions are as follows: (1) reimbursement is the primary driver of the

recent acceleration in genome mix shift, (2) the shift toward genome is likely to continue,

(3) competitively, our checks remain consistent on what drives vendor preference, (4)

WGS's reflex product should be able to absorb some of the shift to genome without

impacting ASPs.

Setting The Stage

Why Did We Do This?

The 1Q26 WGS report left many investors wondering how change happened so fast, •

especially given guidance was set with less than half of 1Q26 to go. For context, WGS

missed WES/WGS revenue on ASP dynamics due to faster mix shift toward genome

(volumes beat consensus). That came out of the blue, with most believing (us included)

shift toward genome would be more gradual. In their new guidance set at 1Q26, WGS