Slides
Page 1
© 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX MoonLake Immunotherapeutics Investor Day February 23rd, 2026
Page 2
© 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXSource: Welcome to our Investor Day MoonLake Corporate Agenda Sub-topicsTopic Speaker Timing FDA update on Phase 3 VELA program VELA and VELA-TEEN clinical update HS and FDA update Jorge 15 mins Welcome MLTX & SLK summary Key points for the session Introduction Matthias 10 mins axSpA market update S-OLARIS program overview Efficacy & safety overview axSpA update Kristian 20 mins Closing remarks & Q&A Jorge Date: February 23rd, 2026 Time: 8.00 am EST Update on Phase 3 program in PPP PsA market update Timeline for IZAR program Overall guidance on other trials Kristian Jorge 15 mins Financial update Matthias 10 mins 2
Page 3
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Corporate 3 Disclaimer Forward Looking Statements Certain statements in this presentation may constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding our expectations, hopes, beliefs, intentions or strategies regarding the future including, without limitation, statements regarding: plans for preclinical studies, clinical trials and research and development programs; the anticipated timing of the results from those studies and trials; potential market opportunities, estimates of market size, and estimates of market growth; potential indications; the timing of regulatory meetings; the occurrence and timing of market engagement; expectations regarding the time period over which our capital resources will be sufficient to fund our anticipated operations; the timing and likelihood of success, plans and objectives of management for future operations and future results of anticipated product development efforts; and effects on liquidity and capital resources, including cash position. In addition, any statements that refer to projections, forecasts, or other characterizations of future events or circumstances, including any underlying assumptions, are forward-looking statements. The words “anticipate”, “believe”, continue”, “could”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intend”, “may”, “might”, “plan”, “possible”, “potential”, “predict”, “project”, “should”, “ strive”, “would” and similar expressions may identify forward-looking statements, but the absence of these words does not mean that such statement is not forward looking. Forward- looking statements are based on current expectations and assumptions that, while we and our management consider reasonable, as the case may be, are inherently uncertain. New risks and uncertainties may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible to predict all risks and uncertainties. Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations include, but are not limited to, various factors beyond management’s control including general economic conditions and other risks, uncertainties and factors set forth in the section entitled “Risk Factors” and “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K that was filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on February 29, 2025, as well as factors associated with companies, such as MoonLake Immunotherapeutics, that operate in the biopharma industry. Nothing in this presentation should be regarded as a representation by any person that the forward-looking statements set forth herein will be achieved or that any of the contemplated results of such forward-looking statements will be achieved. You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements in this presentation, which speak only as of the date they are made and are qualified in their entirety by reference to the cautionary statements herein. We neither undertake nor accept any duty to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statements to reflect any change in our expectations or in the events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based. This presentation does not purport to summarize all of the conditions, risks and other attributes of MoonLake Immunotherapeutics. Industry and Market Data Certain information contained in this presentation relates to or is based on studies, publications, surveys and our own internal estimates and research. In this presentation, we rely on, and refer to, publicly available information and statistics regarding market participants in the sector in which we compete and other industry data. Any comparison of us to any other entity assumes the reliability of the information available to us. We obtained this information and statistics from third-party sources, including reports by market research firms and company filings. In addition, all of the market data included in this presentation involve a number of assumptions and limitations, and there can be no guarantee as to the accuracy or reliability of such assumptions. Finally, while we believe our internal research is reliable, such research has not been verified by any independent source and we have not independently verified the information. Trademarks This presentation may contain trademarks, service marks, trade names and copyrights of other companies, which are the property of their respective owners. Solely for convenience, some of the trademarks, service marks, trade names and copyrights referred to in this presentation may be listed without the TM, SM © or ® symbols, but we will assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, the rights of the applicable owners, if any, to these trademarks, service marks, trade names and copyrights.
Page 4
© 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXSource: Instructions for this session Please take note of the disclaimer on the previous page You can submit your questions through the “Ask a question” function on the top right of your screen – questions are only visible to the moderators – we will address as many questions as possible at the end of this session For any technical issues during the webcast, also use the Q&A function to request support The presentation and a replay will be made available on our IR website Other requests should be directed to ir@moonlaketx.com MoonLake Corporate 4
Page 5
© 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXSource: Founded in 2021 in Switzerland Unique molecule with sonelokimab, tri-specific IL- 17A & F Nanobody® to elevate treatment in inflammation in a $40bn+ market Public on Nasdaq since April 2022 and ~$800m raised through equity to date, plus up to $500m non-dilutive facility, with current cash runway to end of 2027 Clinical phase company with clinical trials including Phase 3 in HS, Phase 2 in PsA, PPP, axSpA and PsO – Phase 3 in PsA expected to be concluded in coming months First BLA submission for sonelokimab in HS expected for second half of this year Driven by a top-tier team, aim is to unlock a pipeline-in-a-product across indications (estimated ~$3bn peak sales in HS & PsA in the US) MoonLake Corporate 5
Page 6
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX 6 A differentiated IL-17A and F molecule: Do you still Antibody? Note: Ig, immunoglobulin; VH, heavy chain variable domain; VHH, variable heavy domain of heavy chain; VL, light chain variabl e domain; 1 Hamers-Casterman, C., et al. Nature. 1993; 363:446 –448; 2 Jovčevska I, Muyldermans S. BioDrugs. 2020;34:11–26; 3 Tijink BM, et al. Mol Cancer Ther. 2008;7:2288–2297; For reference in this presentation: the terms Nanobody® and Nanobodies® are regist ered trademarks of Ablynx, a Sanofi company. Nanobodies® are much smaller than traditional antibodies They can be designed to have multiple and different binding domains Sonelokimab is a ~40kDa humanized Nanobody® consisting of three VHH domains covalently linked by flexible spacers - around a third/quarter of the size of traditional antibodies With 2 domains, it binds with high affinity to IL-17A and IL-17F – a third domain binds human albumin Subcutaneous administration, Q4W SLK is the only asset that binds all IL-17A and F dimers with leading and similar affinity (shown in 2023) Sonelokimab What is a Nanobody®?1,2 A next-generation biologic A humanized fragment of a naturally occurring antibody class which is unique to camelids Conventional IgG (~150 kDa)2 Heavy-chain- only antibody (~85 kDa)2 Nanobody® single-domain antibody (~15 kDa)2,3 MoonLake Medical Affairs & Research
Page 7
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Corporate 7 SLK consistently shows a leading profile across multiple indications Note: Approx response, Selected data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. 1 mNRI 120mg (VELA), NRI 120mg (MIRA), AO 120mg (VELA -TEEN): 34.4% for VELA-1 at Week 16, 34.1% for VELA -2 at Week 16, 43.3% for MIRA at Week 12, 67% for VELA- TEEN at Week 16 (interim data); 2 mNRI 120mg; 3 ITT-NRI 120mg; 4 ITT-NRI, 60mg Dermatology Rheumatology PPP axSpA PsAPsO HS (incl. Adol) Leading benefit-risk profile – absence of signals of events of interest Patient convenience – fewer injections, shorter injection time, lower volumes vs mAbs How MLTX elevates responses 34-43% HiSCR75 response at Week 12/161 40%+ PPPGA0/1 response at Week 162 70%+ PASI90 response at Week 123 46% ACR50 response at Week 124 81% ASAS40 response at Week 124 Estimated Market size ($, 2035) 3-4bn (12% growth from ‘22) 10-15bn (11-15% growth from ‘22) 10-15bn (4% growth from ‘25) 10-15bn (7% growth from ‘25) 20-25bn (8% growth from ‘25) Phase 2 and 3 Phase 2 (Phase 3 to start soon) Phase 2 Phase 2 (Phase 3 ongoing) Phase 2 Key primary endpoint responses HiSCR75, HiSQol PPPGA0/1 and PPPASI75 ACR70 + PASI100, MDA ASDAS-CRP, MRI/PET PASI90-100
Page 8
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Corporate 8 SLK consistently shows a leading profile across multiple indications Note: Approx response, Selected data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. 1 mNRI 120mg (VELA), NRI 120mg (MIRA), AO 120mg (VELA -TEEN): 34.4% for VELA-1 at Week 16, 34.1% for VELA -2 at Week 16, 43.3% for MIRA at Week 12, 67% for VELA- TEEN at Week 16 (interim data); 2 mNRI 120mg; 3 ITT-NRI 120mg; 4 ITT-NRI, 60mg Dermatology Rheumatology PPP axSpA PsAPsO HS (incl. Adol) Leading benefit-risk profile – absence of signals of events of interest Patient convenience – fewer injections, shorter injection time, lower volumes vs mAbs How MLTX elevates responses 34-43% HiSCR75 response at Week 12/161 40%+ PPPGA0/1 response at Week 162 70%+ PASI90 response at Week 123 46% ACR50 response at Week 124 81% ASAS40 response at Week 124 Estimated Market size ($, 2035) 3-4bn (12% growth from ‘22) 10-15bn (11-15% growth from ‘22) 10-15bn (4% growth from ‘25) 10-15bn (7% growth from ‘25) 20-25bn (8% growth from ‘25) Phase 2 and 3 Phase 2 (Phase 3 to start soon) Phase 2 Phase 2 (Phase 3 ongoing) Phase 2 Key primary endpoint responses HiSCR75, HiSQol PPPGA0/1 and PPPASI75 ACR70 + PASI100, MDA ASDAS-CRP, MRI/PET PASI90-100
Page 9
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Corporate An active catalyst flow for MLTX expected in 2026 9 FDA interaction Trial data All future milestones are anticipated dates 2026 up to 60 days ▪ IZAR-2: Ph3 PE read- out ▪ P-OLARIS: Interim read- out IZAR-1: Ph3 PE read-out IZAR-1 Q1 Q4 IZAR-2 Derm event Rheum event AAD VELA HS: Pre-BLA meeting (early April, procedural) CMC pre-BLA (early May) PPP: FDA meeting VELA-TEEN EULAR EADVHS BLA submission VELA-TEEN VELA SHSA/ACR VELA-TEEN: BLA data cut S-OLARIS: PE read-out VELA VELA: Ph3 Wk 52 read-out VELA Mid-year HS BLA acceptance (expected) Focus of today Timeline not scaled
Page 10
© 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX S-OLARIS axSpA Phase 2 readout 10
Page 11
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX 1 Based on Real-World Claims as per Komodo PRISM data pull from December 2025 – extrapolating from 75% coverage to 100% patient population ; 2 Assumptions include prevalence, annually treated patients shares. Bx shares, HS pricing, adherence rates ; 3 Poddubnyy et al. Axial spondyloarthritis by region: PROOF study. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2021; 61:3299 –30; 4 Siebert, Raj & Tsoukas. Epidemiology of axial spondyloarthritis. In: Axial Spondyloarthritis (Oxford Univ. Press), 2016. MoonLake Commercial, © 2025 Komodo Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission. 11 axSpA is an attractive opportunity in a ~$10-15bn market in 2035 What real-world data shows: ▪ ~1.2m unique patients with positive diagnosis for axSpA (M45X) in 2015-2025 in US ▪ ~120k net new patients diagnosed per year on average since 2016 ▪ ~14% of axSpA patients (175k patients today) receive advanced treatments like biologics ▪ Current therapies achieving <50% symptom improvement – with none of them truly being disease modifying Literature estimates prevalence of around 1.4%3,4 Axial Spondyloarthritis (axSpA) at a glance Projected market size (2038)Biologics patients (2020-2038 in US)1 $10-15bn2 Historic Forecast 0k 50k 100k 150k 200k 250k 300k 350k 400k 2020 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 2038 175+12% +6% % CAGR
Page 12
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Clinical 12 Elevating the bar with biomarker control and imaging at depth A Phase 2 open-label imaging study to explore the effects of sonelokimab in patients with active axial spondyloarthritis Assessments and major milestones SLK administration Assessments (as shown on next pages): ▪ ASAS40 score ▪ ASDAS-CRP score ▪ Structural lesions in SIJs as measured by SPARCC MRI ▪ Osteoblast activity in SIJs as measured by 18F-NaF signalling ▪ Biomarker-control (peripheral blood) Major milestones: • EU CTR approval: Nov 2024 • FPI: Dec 2024 • LPI: Sep 2025 • PE read-out: Feb 2026 SLK 60 mg: Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8 164 12 1° EP 8 Last dose Week 0 N=26 (enrolled) Treatment (12 weeks) Screening (up to 4 weeks) Safety follow-up (4 weeks) CfB, Change from Baseline; axSpA, Axial Spondyloarthritis; SUV, Standardized Uptake Value; SIJ, Sacroiliac Joints; NaF, Sodium Fluoride; PROs, Patient-Reported Outcomes; EU CTR = European Union Clinical Trials Regulation; PET, Positron Emission T omography; MRI, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Biopsy PET/MRI (18F-NaF) Biopsy PET/MRI (18F-NaF)
Page 13
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Medical Affairs & Research 13 Competition: What have other axSpA trials shown? 1 van der Heijde D. Ann Rheum Dis 2023;82:515 (naïve and IR population); 2 Deodhar A. RMD Open 2025;11:e005081. 3 Baeten D. New Eng J Med 2015;373:26 (naïve and IR population). 4 Deodhar A. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2021 Jan;73(1):110-120 (naïve and IR population). 5 van der Heijde D. Lancet 2019; 394: 2108–17 (naïve population). 6 van der Heijde D. Ann Rheum Dis 2022;81:1515 (IR population). 7 van der Heijde et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008 Aug 12;68(6):922–929. 8 Van der Heijde D. RMD Open 2022;8:e0002280 (supplement). 9 van der Heijde D. Lancet 2018;392:2441-51 (naïve population). 10 Safety concerns (non exhaustive) as per US PI, including warnings and precautions and Black box warnings; Suicidal Ideation Behavior, IBD, Irritable Bowel Disease, MACE, Major adverse cardiovascular events. 11 Dougados M. Ann Rheum Dis 2020;79:176-185. 12. Liver biochemical abnormalities. 13 Baraliakos X. Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis. 2024 Nov 28;16:1759720X241293944. 14 Groothuizen S. Ann Rheum Dis 2025;84:421–422. Note: For illustrative purposes only. Efficacy data are derived from different clinical trials conducted at different times, with differences in trial design and patient populations. As a result, cross-trial comparisons cannot be made, and no head-to-head (H2H) clinical trials have been conducted. Humira only approved in r-axSpA. Select data points not explicitly stated in publications have been derived through software-based extraction. Highest reference value across radiographic- and non-radiographic axSpA trials taken. ▪ Several biologics are approved for axSpA, yet a substantial unmet need persists ▪ Only ~40–50% of patients achieve ASAS40 – Humira leads the market but used the less stringent ASAS20 as its primary endpoint ▪ Even more elevated scores, such as ASDAS currently show much space for improvement Overview of comparable biologics approved in axSpA (not based on H2H trials) Bolded = primary endpoint PET imaging Patients achieving ASDAS-CII (%) 48%4 Week 16 62%11 Week 16 53%8 Week 14 Safety warnings on US label10 Infections, IBD, … Infections, IBD, … Serious infections, Mortality, Malign- ancy, MACE, Thrombosis, … Black box warning Patients achieving ASAS40 in % ~62%2 Week 12 SIB, Infections, IBD, Liver abnor- malities, …12 48%1 Week 16 n/a Serious infections, Malignancy, … 45%7 Week 12 42%3-4 Week 16 52%5-6 Week 14 48%9 Week 16 13 14 Not part of pivotal trial
Page 14
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX 70 35 42 51 MoonLake Biometrics 14 80+% ASAS40 responders at Week 12 with SLK For illustrative purposes only. Efficacy data are derived from different newer clinical trials conducted at different times, with differences in trial design and patient populations. As a result, cross-trial comparisons cannot be made, and no head-to-head clinical trials have been conducted. Select data points not explicitly stated in publications have been derived through software-based extraction. Extrapolated kinetics from baseline to primary endpoint in selected cases; Competitor data based on NRI methodology excl. one competitor with post wk 16 1° EP data and one competitor with nr-axSpA data at wk 52 (both as observed). 1 Early withdrawal data imputed as non-responders for sonelokimab; other missing data imputed using multiple imputation (modified NRI); Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. Total participants in S-OLARIS: n=26 at Weeks 4 and 12; n=24 at Week 8; 35% nr- axSpA and 65% r-axSpA; 2 Competitor data shows disclosed competitor data inclusive of r-axSpA and nr-axSpA. Approximate range due to use of software-based extraction for select data points and variations in methodology ▪ S-OLARIS data show unprecedented speed of onset – with 77% of patients achieving ASAS40 by Week 4 ▪ Response rises to over 80% by Week 12 – outperforming competitor long-term data through all time points, including 1 year data ▪ Baseline characteristics of S-OLARIS are aligned with expectations 77 87 81 Week 16Week 4 Week 8 Week 12 ASAS40 responders, % of patients Sonelokimab 60mg (mNRI1) Competitor range2 Week 52 21 22 25 25 31 53
Page 15
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Biometrics 15 80+% show a shift to inactive or low disease activity by Week 12 ASDAS-CRP Categories1 (As Observed) 100% 81% 81% 19% 19% 0 4 12 High and Very High Disease Activity Inactive and Low Disease ASDAS-CRP Category (%) Week ▪ SLK shows rapid onset of effect in ASDAS-CRP – with over 80% of patients reaching inactive or low disease activity already by Week 4 ▪ This response is sustained through Week 12 – underscoring strong durability of effect ▪ ASDAS-CRP inactive and low disease response ~20 ppt. higher vs. >1-year open-label data from competitors in the same MoA Total participants in S-OLARIS: n=26 at Weeks 0, 4 and 12; 35% nr -axSpA and 65% r-axSpA; 1 The ASDAS-CRP formula is: 0.12 × Back Pain + 0.06 × Morning Stiffness + 0.11 × Patient Global + 0.07 × Peripheral Pain/Swelling + 0.58 × ln (CRP + 1), All symptom scores are rated on a scale from 0 to 10. Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued.
Page 16
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX 81 94 89 60 59 61 65 MoonLake Biometrics 16 ~90% experience clinically important improvement by Week 12 Week 4 Week 8 Week 12 Week 16 36 46 44 45 For illustrative purposes only. Efficacy data are derived from newer different clinical trials conducted at different times, with differences in trial design and patient populations. As a result, cross-trial comparisons cannot be made, and no head-to-head clinical trials have been conducted 1 A clinically important improvement is a reduction of at least 1.1 points; 2 Early withdrawal data imputed as non-responders for sonelokimab; other missing data imputed using multiple imputation (modified NRI). Total participants in S-OLARIS: n=26 at Weeks 4 and 12; n=23 at Week 8; 35% nr-axSpA and 65% r-axSpA. 3 Competitor data shows disclosed competitor data inclusive of r-axSpA and nr-axSpA. Approximate range due to use of software-based extraction for select data points and variations in methodology; 4 ASDAS-CRP measured as 5 components: Back pain (last week), duration of morning stiffness, patient global assessment of disease activity, peripheral pain / swelling, and C-reactive protein level. Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. ▪ ~90% of patients achieved a clinically important improvement as per ASDAS- CRP score at Week 12 ▪ Additionally, 58% of patients achieve a major improvement – versus highest competitor score of 33% at Week 12/16 ▪ ASDAS-CRP CII response at Week 12 also higher vs. >1- year open-label data from competitors in the same MoA ASDAS-CRP4 Clinically Important Improvement1 (%) Competitor range3Sonelokimab 60mg (mNRI2)
Page 17
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Biometrics 17 SLK shows strong reduction of structural damage For illustrative purposes only. Efficacy data are derived from different clinical trials conducted at different times, with d ifferences in trial design and patient populations and different baseline scores. As a result, cross -trial comparisons cannot be made, and no head-to-head clinical trials have been conducted. Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. 1 Change from baseline in SPARCC MRI score in SIJ at Week 12 (n=25); 2 Competitor mean SIJ change -from-baseline (CfB) SPARCC inflammation score ranges are based on disclosed competitor data, inclusive of r -axSpA and nr-axSpA Week 12 Week 14/16 Competitor range2 -6.3 -2.5 SLK achieved a 21.8- point reduction in inflammatory lesions in the SIJ as measured by SPARCC MRI – outperforming other competitor data Mean change from baseline in SPARCC MRI score in SIJs at primary endpoint vs baseline Sonelokimab 60mg1 P<0.001 92% of patients achieved a decrease of their SPARCC score in SIJs -21.8 (~90% reduction of score)
Page 18
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Biometrics SLK shows disease modifying effects deep in joints as early as week 12 Change in mean SUVmax score (SIJ) – corresponding to disease modification1 by reduction of bone re-modeling 6.7 3.8 Week 0 Week 12 -43%* Already at week 12, SLK dramatically reduces the levels of bone re-modeling (i.e., osteoblastic activity) that lead to irreversible ossification over time – signal for true disease modification 18 1 Change from baseline in 18F-NaF SUVmax signals at Week 12 in the SIJ as detected by PET scan (n=24). Analysis shows participant -level mean SIJ SUVmax scores; p-value from a paired t-test comparing Week 12 with Baseline . Scores reflect inflammatory activity with physiological background removed (each patient’s imaging response is evaluated relative to their own healthy re ference at baseline and Week 12). Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued.; *p=<0.001 Example PET image of patient participating in S-OLARIS Week 12 SLK shows rapid onset of disease-modifying effects in a condition where structural change is typically slow Levels remain above zero due to the baseline osteoblastic activity needed for joint maintenance
Page 19
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Medical Affairs and Research 19 Distinct axSpA serum biomarker signature modulated by SLK Pearson correlation analysis for the association between change from baseline in ASDAS -CRP and change from baseline in biomarker levels at Week 12 (raw p-value < 0.05). Interim analysis (n=17). Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. 1 Bechara et al. JEM, 2021, 218 (5): e20202191 2 Yang et al. J Mol Medicine 2025, 1317 –1332; 3 Hochepied et al. Cytokine Growth FR, 2003;14(1),25-34; 4 Croft et al, 2009; Nat Rev Immunol; 9(4), 271 -285; 5 Ma et al., Front Immunol, 2 018;9:3046 ▪ Modulation of these markers shows that SLK attenuates chronic inflammatory signalling and interrupts the disease cascade implicated in structural progression in axSpA ▪ Response pattern validates clinical response to SLK as it rules out natural disease activity fluctuation Correlation of Key Biomarkers with SLK ASDAS-CRP response, Week 12
Page 20
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Medical & Safety 20 Safety profile of sonelokimab was favorable throughout entire study Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE), n (%) S-OLARIS to Week 12 ARGO to Week 12 Sonelokimab 60 mg N=26 Sonelokimab 60 mg N=41 Any TEAE Any Serious TEAE Any TEAE leading to discontinuation 14 (53.8) 1 (3.8)c 1 (3.8)c 14 (34.1) 1 (2.4) 0 Most frequent TEAEs of SLK in S-OLARIS Influenza Fatigue Blood creatine phosphokinase increased 3 (11.5) 2 (7.7) 2 (7.7) 0 1 (2.4) 0 TEAEs of interest Oral candidiasis 1 (3.8) 1 (2.4) Dermatitis and eczemaa 0 0 Serious infection 0 1 (2.4)b Diarrhea (non-infectious) 0 1 (2.4) Hepatic event 0 0 Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) 0 0 Suicidal ideation and behavior (SIB) 0 0 Major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) 0 0 Adjudication is ongoing. a Patients with events assigned to either of the preferred terms ‘dermatitis’ and ‘eczema’. b Appendicitis. c Generalised urticaria in a single patient, Grade 2 severity, assessed as not related. Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. Sonelokimab demonstrated a clean safety profile throughout the S-OLARIS study – with notable emerging areas of potential differentiation including a favorable hepatic / liver profile, no signals related to suicidality, and potentially improved skin tolerability
Page 21
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Corporate 21 Conclusions axSpA is an attractive opportunity in a ~$10-15bn market in 2035 Current therapeutic options show limited efficacy, with only ~40– 50% of patients achieving ASAS40 SLK raises the efficacy bar, with S-OLARIS showing patients with 80+% ASAS40 and ~90% clinically important improvement by Week 12 Imaging, biomarker, and tissue data confirm rapid, durable deep-tissue effects – underlining sonelokimab’s potential to change the treatment paradigm in axSpA (reduction of inflammation, reduction of ossification/bone re-modeling) Safety was in line with other trials and no new signals were detected Next steps: Begin the regulatory process with relevant agencies in parallel with the upcoming PsA readout
Page 22
© 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX HS BLA update 22
Page 23
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX Next steps for MLTX ▪ No additional clinical trials needed in HS, as two well-controlled trials are required to establish substantial evidence of effectiveness (SEE) and MLTX can submit three such trials ▪ VELA-1 and MIRA – to be submitted to establish SEE and to support safety ▪ VELA-2 to be submitted for safety – its use in establishing SEE to be discussed ▪ Submission of VELA-1 trial alone for establishment of SEE excluded ▪ Submission of VELA-1 and VELA-2 for establishment of SEE, without MIRA, excluded ▪ Note: establishing SEE is a specific element the BLA process including Sec 14. – all preclinical & clinical data (incl. all VELA-2 data) will be included with the full BLA submission ▪ BLA timelines as planned – with submission planned for Q3 2026 MoonLake Regulatory 23 Recent FDA feedback provided regulatory clarity for BLA process SEE, Substantial evidence of effectiveness Preparation for FDA meeting Following VELA read-out on September 29th, 2025 ▪ Briefing book submitted on November 5th, 2025, with ~100s of pages of supporting VELA data analysis (incl. VELA-2 placebo data) – FDA reviewed all data ahead of the meeting ▪ Final minutes of the Type B in December 2025 already shared with MoonLake
Page 24
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Regulatory 24 Why does MIRA matter? PBO = Placebo arm, REF = Reference arm, LD = Loading Dose, WI = With Induction, SOC = Standard of Care Sources: Jemec et al Presented at EHSF 2000 - and - Glatt et al JAMA Dermatol 2021;157:1279; Kimball et al Exp Dermatol 2022;31:1522 All three MLTX HS trials are adequately and well controlled MIRA Phase 2 VELA-1/2 Phase 3 Regulatory considerations Patients 838 559 SLK, 279 PBO One adequate & well controlled trial Large RCT with similar study design to Phase 3 Two adequate & well controlled trials 234 133 SLK, 68 PBO, 33 SOC Investigational product SLK 120mg Q4W WI (proposed commercial dose) Bimekizumab Phase 2 Secukinumab Phase 2 Competitors likely not able to use Phase 2 trials as pivotal (different dose to approval, few patients, IIT etc.) N/A No Phase 2 trial Progress to Ph3 relied on investigator-initiated trial Proof-of-concept Small POC study integrating historical placebo data 90 46 BKZ, 22 PBO, 22 SOC BKZ 320mg Q2W+640mg LD (NOT commercial dose) Treatment duration N/A 12 weeks24 weeks 52 weeks
Page 25
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX MoonLake Regulatory 25 What matters in a label: Sections 14, 5 and 2 FDA label example, secukinumab example Potential areas of differentiation Clinical response of trials incl. supplementary text, figures and additional clinical data – enabling potential differentiation on efficacy and PROs (where SEE is primarily reflected) Section 14 Warnings and precautions – enabling potential differentiation of safety-benefit ratio Section 5 Required dosing scheme – enabling potential differentiation number, time and volume of injections Section 2
Page 26
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Regulatory 26 What matters in a label: The information you should expect Section 5 Warnings and precautions – enabling potential differentiation on safety-benefit ratio Section 2 Required dosing scheme – enabling potential differentiation on less or lower volume injections Section 14 Clinical response of trials incl. supplementary text, figures and additional clinical data – enabling potential differentiation on efficacy and PROs (where SEE is primarily reflected) – competitors only have HiSCR Bimekizumab label Secukinumab
Page 27
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Clinical 27 Building on feedback, this is our base scenario for Sec. 14 Note: Absolute responses shown, delta to placebo in brackets, VELA -1 and VELA-2 results for Week 16, MIRA results for Week 12; Bimekizumab data as per FDA label for HS (Section 14) and approved dose. IHS4 -55, Pain NRS-3, HiSQOL were not ranked endpoints in MIRA. Prespecified analysis method has been used for all outcome in VELA and MIRA. For illustrative purposes only. Efficac y data are derived from different clinical trials conducted at different times, with differences in trial design and patient pop ulations. As a result, cross-trial comparisons cannot be made, and no head -to-head clinical trials have been conducted. Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. 1 Baseline numbers would be included HiSCR75, % HiSCR50, % HS trial 1 (Corresponds to VELA-1) HS trial 2 (Corresponds to MIRA) 34.4 (16.9) 43.3 (28.6) 51.0 (20.7) 65.7 (37.8) Sonelokimab, week 16 and week 12 HS trial 1 Note on improvement in patient-reported worst skin pain (lesion pain) compared to placebo at Week 16 (despite not meeting stat sign in BH1 and for one dose in BH2) No HiSQoL, no IHS4 notes 33 (15) 48 (18) 36 (20) 52 (20) HS trial 2 IL-17A and F mAb Week 16 IHS4-55, % Pain NRS-3, % HiSQOL, CfB1 Text on Pain NRS-3 Text on HiSQOL Text on IHS4-55 Efficacy data relevant for potential label Absolute response (Delta-to-placebo); VELA data reflects composite strategy analysis (ITT-mNRI) This would result in a leading Sec 14 versus the expected competitors Potential label options for sonelokimab reflecting MLTX’s current views based on data and prior regulatory correspondence
Page 28
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Clinical 28 An “upside case” also includes other responses in the Sec. 14 table Note: Absolute responses shown, delta to placebo in brackets, VELA -1 and VELA-2 results for Week 16, MIRA results for Week 12; Bimekizumab data as per FDA label for HS (Section 14) and approved dose. IHS4 -55, Pain NRS-3, HiSQOL were not ranked endpoints in MIRA. Prespecified analysis method has been used for all outcome in VELA and MIRA. For illustrative purposes only. Efficac y data are derived from different clinical trials conducted at different times, with differences in trial design and patient pop ulations. As a result, cross-trial comparisons cannot be made, and no head -to-head clinical trials have been conducted. Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. 1 Baseline numbers would be included HiSCR75, % HiSCR50, % HS trial 1 (Corresponds to VELA-1) HS trial 2 (Corresponds to MIRA) 34.4 (16.9) 43.3 (28.6) 51.0 (20.7) 65.7 (37.8) Sonelokimab, week 16 and week 12 HS trial 1 Note on improvement in patient-reported worst skin pain (lesion pain) compared to placebo at Week 16 (despite not meeting stat sign in BH1 and for one dose in BH2) No HiSQoL, no IHS4 notes 33 (15) 48 (18) 36 (20) 52 (20) HS trial 2 IHS4-55, % 53.2 (19.3) 62.7 (33.3) Pain NRS-3, % 28.4 (16.9) 22.0 (19.9) HiSQOL, CfB1 -8.8 (-5.7) -9.4 (-4.4) Text on Pain NRS-3, HiSQOL and IHS4-55 (see previous option) could be included as numbers Efficacy data relevant for potential label IL-17A and F mAb Week 16 This would result in a leading Sec 14 versus the expected competitors Absolute response (Delta-to-placebo); VELA data reflects composite strategy analysis (ITT-mNRI) Potential label options for sonelokimab reflecting MLTX’s current views based on data and prior regulatory correspondence
Page 29
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Clinical 29 Potential inclusion of VELA-2 data for SEE only supports Sec.14 further Note: Absolute responses shown, delta to placebo in brackets, VELA -1 and VELA-2 results for Week 16, MIRA results for Week 12; B imekizumab data as per FDA label for HS (Section 14) and approved dose. IHS4 -55, Pain NRS-3, HiSQOL were not ranked endpoints in MIRA. Prespecified analysis method has been used for all outcome in VELA and MIRA. For illustrative purposes only. Efficac y data are derived from different clinical trials conducted at different times, with differences in trial design and patient pop ulations. As a result, cross-trial comparisons cannot be made, and no head -to-head clinical trials have been conducted. Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. 1 Baseline numbers would be included HiSCR75, % HiSCR50, % HS trial 1 (Corresponds to VELA-1) HS trial 2 (Corresponds to MIRA) 34.4 (16.9) 51.0 (20.7) 65.7 (37.8) Sonelokimab, week 16 and week 12 HS trial 1 Note on improvement in patient-reported worst skin pain (lesion pain) compared to placebo at Week 16 (despite not meeting stat sign in BH1 and for one dose in BH2) No HiSQoL, no IHS4 notes 33 (15) 48 (18) 36 (20) 52 (20) HS trial 2 43.3 (28.6) IHS4-55, % 53.2 (19.3) 62.7 (33.3) Pain NRS-3, % 28.4 (16.9) 22.0 (19.9) HiSQOL, CfB1 -8.8 (-5.7) -9.4 (-4.4) HS trial 3 (would correspond to VELA-2) Efficacy data relevant for potential label IL-17A and F mAb Week 16 This would result in a leading Sec 14 versus the expected competitors Absolute response (Delta-to-placebo); VELA data reflects composite strategy analysis (ITT-mNRI) Potential label options for sonelokimab reflecting MLTX’s current views based on data and prior regulatory correspondence Text on Pain NRS-3, HiSQOL and IHS4-55 (see previous option) could be included as numbers If VELA-2 is included in SEE: Data might be in table or referenced as text – some or only one score might be used
Page 30
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Regulatory 30 Warnings & Precautions + Dosage: SLK has differentiation potential SLK differentiation potential Section 5 Warnings and Precautions ▪ Suicidal Ideation and Behavior ▪ Infections ▪ Tuberculosis ▪ Liver Biochemical Abnormalities ▪ Inflammatory Bowel Disease ▪ Immunization ▪ Infections ▪ Hypersensitivity Reactions ▪ Pre-Treatment Evaluation for Tuberculosis ▪ Inflammatory Bowel Disease ▪ Eczematous Eruptions ▪ Risk of Hypersensitivity in Latex- Sensitive Individuals ▪ Immunization No evidence of association between IL-17 inhibition and TB reactivation. Clinical trials and post-marketing data show no increased TB risk No TEAEs of SIB reported in Phase 3 trials. C-SSRS validated for risk identification and monitoring treatment response No signal for hepatic events or elevated transaminases in SLK clinical trials Section 2 Dosage and Administration ▪ 320 mg by subcutaneous injection ▪ Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16, then every 4 weeks thereafter ▪ 300 mg by subcutaneous injection ▪ Weeks 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 and every 4 weeks thereafter ▪ If patient does not adequately respond, consider increasing the dosage to 300 mg every 2 weeks Short induction duration: 8 weeks induction period Low injection volume: 120mg subcutaneous injection Few induction injections: 5 injections for induction period Low eczema and dermatitis signals long- term as another potential commercial differentiation opportunity (not in label) Additional differentiation points
Page 31
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX 43 38 SUNRISE SUNSHINE MoonLake Clinical 31 Long-term data: HiSCR75 response of SLK increases over time Note: Note differences in long-term response times given different study durations. Data are as observed. VELA -1 and VELA-2 trials are ongoing with the number participants reaching W52 expected to increase over time. Data for Bimekizumab include all patients receiving Q2W until Week 16, and patients randomized to the Q2W>Q4W dosing scheme from Week 16 to Week 4 8. The Bimekizumab studies were 48-week studies, hence no Week 52 data are available. For illustrative purposes only. Efficacy data are derived from different clinical trials conducted at different times, with d ifferences in trial design and patient populations. As a result, cross -trial comparisons cannot be made, and no head -to-head clinical trials have been conducted. Sources: Kimball et al. Lancet 2024;403:2504; Kimball et al. Lancet 2023;401:747. 1 SLK arm only, no PBO-to-SLK switch-over patients; 2 Approved dose of Bimekizumab 320mg Q2W until Week 16 and Q4W after. 3 Approved dose for secukinumab 300mg, Q4W from Week 4 onwards; 4 Assumed number of patients achieving W52. Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. 56 64 BE HEARD I BE HEARD II 69 67 VELA-1 VELA-2 Long-term HiSCR75 response rates at end of parental trial (OC), in % of patients Strong long-term efficacy data establishes potential beneficial commercial positioning for SLK – also when compared to other available clinical data 320mg, Q2W > Q4W2120mg, SLK1 Bimekizumab (320mg)Sonelokimab (120mg) Secukinumab (300mg) 300mg, Q4W3 n 104/~2104 123/~2104 104 107 127 128
Page 32
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Clinical 32 Long-term data: Pain and HiSQoL continue to improve over time Data are as observed. Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. BKZ data from marketing materials. Pain NRS was assessed weekly, HiSQOL was assessed at specific timepoints. HiSQOL baseline values: 27.2 for SLK, 25.7 for PBO. Pain NRS data based on worst skin pain. 1 Only includes participants with a baseline Pain NRS score ≥3 ▪ Continuous improvement of relevant quality of life scores beyond Week 16 for sonelokimab ▪ Substantial and rapid improvement in pain and HiSQOL observed in placebo-switch group Pain response (OC) HiSQOL improvement (OC) 45.9 44.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 -13.2 -14.0 -16 -12 -8 -4 0 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 -6.3 PBO > SLK 120mg (VELA-1/2) SLK 120mg (VELA-1/2) SLK 120mg (VELA-1/2) PBO > SLK 120mg (VELA-1/2) % patients achieving response (at least 3 point reduction of Pain NRS)1 Week Week Mean change from baseline PBO>SLK, n SLK, n 279 270 259 249 240 231 126 558 537 509 485 445 411 226 PBO>SLK, n SLK, n 209 200 195 197 187 177 176 407 385 376 362 350 332 315 174 301 171 291 169 291 160 276 156 256 124 205 88 148
Page 33
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Clinical 33 VELA-TEEN: SLK also shows rapid onset of effect in adolescent patients Total participants at each timepoint: Week 16 (n=21), Week 24 (n=12). Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. VELA-TEEN trials are ongoing with the number participants reaching W16 and W24 expected to increase over time. HiSCR response rates (As observed), in % of patients We are aiming for further differentiation in our label through our strong adolescent HS efficacy data – interim Week-24 data showing 80+% achieving HiSCR50, ~65+% achieving HiSCR75, and 30+% achieving HiSCR100 HiSCR50 HiSCR75 Week 24 Week 16 76 83 67 67 48 33 HiSCR100 Week 24 Week 16 Week 24 Week 16 SLK shows strong HiSCR responses at week 16 – with week 24 scores continuing to improve as more patients come in
Page 34
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE), n (%) VELA-TEEN to Week 281 Sonelokimab 120 mg N=27 Any TEAE Any Serious TEAE Any TEAE leading to discontinuation 13 (48.1) 0 1 (3.7)2 Most frequent TEAEs of SLK (≥5% with active treatment) Nasopharyngitis Oral candidiasis 3 (11.1) 1 (3.7) TEAEs of interest Oral candidiasis 1 (3.7) Dermatitis 0 Eczema 0 Serious infection 0 Diarrhea (non-infectious) 0 Hepatic event 0 Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) 0 Suicidal ideation and behavior (SIB) 0 Serious hypersensitivity 0 Major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) 0 MoonLake Clinical 34 Clean safety profile signals leading benefit risk ratio across program Adjudication is ongoing. 1 Different patients are at different time points as the trials are still running – indicated week is the maximum week to be reached; 2 Discontinuation due to Dysuria Sonelokimab is also showing a clean safety profile in the VELA-TEEN program, suggesting a favorable benefit-risk ratio in the adolescent population, consistent with VELA-1 and VELA-2
Page 35
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Corporate 35 BLA submission timeline remains as planned ▪ Regulatory clarity obtained at a stage where other companies typically do not get it ▪ Clear guidance to complete a BLA, with the full preclinical and clinical packages (incl. MIRA, VELA-1, VELA-2) ▪ Clear consideration of what data is considered to establish SEE and safety ▪ The true chance to be numerically leading in efficacy data incl. HiSCR ▪ A strong profile on metrics that truly matter for physicians and patients (i.e., HiSQOL, pain, DLQI, safety) BLA submission expected to be on time and without any adjustments post VELA read-out – planned for Q3 2026 with planned commercial launch of SLK in Q3 2027 2026 Type B meeting Regulatory clarity on ▪ VELA data ▪ No additional trial needed up to 60 days HS BLA submission Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2025 up to 60 days HS commercial launch Q3 2027 Procedural and technical questions Q4 Including VELA, MIRA, VELA-TEEN HS PE read-out ▪ VELA primary endpoint readout HS Pre-BLA meeting CMC pre- BLA HS additional data ▪ VELA-TEEN ▪ VELA Ph3 Wk 52 Timeline not scaled HS BLA acceptance (expected)
Page 36
© 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX Other updates & guidance 36
Page 37
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX 37 PPP: A fast-growing disease with a continued unmet need 1 Ramcharran et al. Adv Ther. 2023;40:5090-5101; 2 Brunasso AMG, Massone C, Faculty Reviews. 2021; 10:62 ; 3 Based on Real-World Claims as per Komodo PRISM data pull from December 2025 – extrapolating from 75% coverage to 100% patient population ; 4 Assumptions include prevalence, annually treated patients shares. Bx shares, HS pricing, adherence rates PPP phenotype PP phenotype (palmoplantar (plaque-type) psoriasis) Micro-anatomy What real-world data shows: ▪ ~185k unique patients with positive diagnosis for PPP (L40.3) in 2015-2025 in US ▪ ~20k net new patients diagnosed p.a. on average since 2016 ▪ ~450k+ patients with PPP in 2038 assuming growth continues at same rate as observed in prior years Estimated prevalence of target population 0.3%1,2,3 Palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP) at a glance Projected market size (2038)Biologics patients (2020-2038 in US)3 $4-5bn4 Historic Forecast 0k 5k 10k 15k 20k 25k 30k 35k 40k 2020 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 2038 +13% +6% No approved or effective therapy in U.S. and Europe Even without approvals several thousand patients already treated with biologics – in an attempt to control the disease % CAGR MoonLake Commercial, © 2025 Komodo Health, Inc. All rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.
Page 38
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Clinical 38 PPP: The Phase 2 LEDA trial read-out in Q4 2025 PPPASI, palmoplantar Psoriasis Area and Severity Index; CfB, Change from Baseline A Phase 2, multi-center, open-label study to explore the effects of sonelokimab in patients with moderate-to-severe PPP Primary clinical endpoint: ▪ % CfB of PPPASI at week 16 Key secondary clinical endpoints ▪ PPPASI50 at week 16 ▪ PPPASI75 at week 16 ▪ PPPGA 0/1 + 2pts Objective endpoints (biomarker-controlled study): ▪ Tissue biomarkers (lL-17A&F) – objective outcome control) ▪ Peripheral blood biomarkers (e.g., IL-19) ▪ AI-image analysis Treatment (16 weeks) Screening (up to 4 weeks) Safety follow-up (4 weeks) N=32 (enrolled) SLK 120 mg: Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 204 8Week 0 16 1° EP 12 Last dose Dosing Tissue biomarkers Peripheral blood biomarkers Major milestones: • FPI: Jan 2025 • LPI: Q2 2025 • PE read-out: Q4 2025 Endpoints and major milestones SLK administration
Page 39
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Biometrics 39 PPP: SLK shows strong results in the key endpoints for Phase 3 PPPGA 0/1+2 pts (BL > 2) response rate, in % of patients PPPASI75 response rate, in % of patients Sonelokimab 120mg (mNRI) Sonelokimab 120mg (OC) +40% of patients with SLK achieved a PPPGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) and a reduction of at least 2 points from baseline1 SLK outperforms benchmarks – Week 16 PPPASI75 results more than 10 pp above (also compared to week 24 benchmarks) For illustrative purposes only. Efficacy data are derived from different clinical trials conducted at different times, with differences in trial design and patient populations. As a result, cross-trial comparisons cannot be made, and no head-to-head clinical trials have been conducted. Select data points not explicitly stated in publications have been derived through software-based extraction. Extrapolated kinetics from baseline to primary endpoint in selected cases. PPPGA scores based on physician assessment across categories 0 (clear) to 4 (severe); PPP-IGA and PPPGA represent the same score. Total participants for sonelokimab at each timepoint: wk 2 (n=31), wk 4 (n=31), wk 6 (n=31), wk 8 (n=30), wk 16 (n=27). 1 Baseline score higher than two; 2 Pooled competitor data includes data from Spesolimab combined, non-Asian (Burden A D et al. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2023 Sep 20;13(10):2279–2297), Apremilast 30mg (Wilsmann-Theis D. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2021;35:2045-2050), Guselkumab 100mg (Wilsmann-Theis D et al. JAAD Int. 2025;18:69-78), Secukinumab 300mg (Mrowietz et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80:1344-52). Patients enrolled for SPEVIGO IIb in 300 and 600mg arm (non-Asian), for 2Precise in 300mg Secukinumab arm. Data subject to change until clinical study reports are issued. Week 2 Week 4 Week 6 Week 8 Week 16 Week 24 3 13 34 42 43 3.2 22.6 29.0 33.1 Week 2 Week 4 Week 6 Week 8 Week 16 44.4 Competitor range2
Page 40
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Clinical 40 PPP: Phase 3 design aims for an expedited read-out ▪ Phase 3 program backed by Phase 2 data and an optimized dosing regimen – with Week 12 primary endpoint enabling a faster readout ▪ Competitive study design for sites and patients; FPI expected in Q3 2026 ▪ Further, FDA Fast Track designation allowing more frequent FDA interactions ▪ In contrast, BKZ entering Phase 3 without Phase 2 data and using a later Week 16 primary endpoint Final analysis ▪ PPPGA 0/1 Primary endpoint ▪ PPPASI 75 response ▪ PPPASI 50 response ▪ Pain response ▪ DLQI MCID response Secondary endpoints Primary endpoint PBO-controlled Maintenance SLK 120 mg Q2W Maint. analysis SLK 120 mg Q2WOptional: Up-titration if no PPPGA0/1 at wk38 and 40 124 124 R Week 52Week 0 Week 12 Week 36 Placebo SLK 120 mg Q2W124 Sonelokimab 120 mg Q2W Sonelokimab 120 mg Q4W Sonelokimab 120 mg Q2W As per current MoonLake plan – subject to FDA interactions
Page 41
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX PsA: Breaking the treatment level – SLK is the next-gen treatment ▪ PsA prevalence continues to grow – ~20% between Q4 2023 and Q4 2025 (1.8mn to 2.1mn patients)3 ▪ Historically, PsA treatments were single- domain focused – different products used for distinct patients (e.g., IBD, skin-mainly) and by different HCPs (e.g., IL-23 by derms) ▪ Given large PsA market size, most undifferentiated products reach $1bn+ p.a. ▪ IL-17 A&F is developed to elevate the treatment ceiling across domains, well- positioned for leadership across entire PsA ▪ Hence, SLK not directly competing with most PsA drugs (12+) that remain single-domain focused (more like 3-5 competitors) Treatment levels and positioning for existing products in PsA1 IL-17A only ACR50 + PASI90 TNFs & JAKs ACR50 IL-12 & IL-23 PsA PASI100 Next gen drugs (IL-17 A&F) ACR (50, 70) + PASI 100 MDA Others Orals ACR20 SLK Multi-domain focused ~$0.5bn ~$2bn $2.5bn $2.5bn xx 2025 revenue ($bn)2 Unique U.S. patients from prescription data – MoonLake Commercial, © 2023 Komodo Health, Inc. All rights reserved.; Market resear ch Current SoC level 1 Based on clinical efficacy and Commercial product positioning; 2 Class revenue based on MoonLake estimate of 2024 total mar ket sales and 2024 patient share by class; 3 Increase of uniquely diagnosed and treated patients between data cut -off in Q4 2023 (Q4 2015-Q4 2023) and Q4 2025 (Q4 2015 -Q4 2025) – diagnosed and treated patients ≥18 years with PsA diagnosis (ICD -10 L40.5), applied ~75% coverage rate of U.S. claims, applied claims collection lag extrapolation for last 12 months 41
Page 42
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Clinical 42 PsA: The IZAR program is a key potential catalyst for MoonLake in 2026 IZAR-2 Recruitment status Recruitment ongoingRecruitment completed Phase 3 clinical trial in bio-experienced patients with PsA, with a Risankizumab reference arm Phase 3 clinical trial in bio-naïve and radiographic patients with PsA Timeline Primary endpoint readout expected in Q4 2026 Primary endpoint readout expected in Q2/Q3 2026 IZAR-1 Expected upcoming read-outs In alignment with regulatory guidance to avoid unblinding, the primary endpoint read -out is expected to include: 1. Meeting/not meeting of statistical significance (for primary endpoint & hierarchy) 2. SLK response levels for primary and key secondary endpoints for 60mg1,2 & 120mg2 1 For IZAR-1 2 For IZAR-1 and for IZAR-2
Page 43
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX 511.0 547.1 MoonLake Corporate 43 Finance: Additional funding further strengthened our balance sheet December 31, 2024 73.02 407.1 March 31, 2025 June 30, 2025 September 30, 2025 72.4 321.6 December 31, 2025 448.0 480.1 425.1 380.5 394.0 -40.9 -55.0 -44.6 -58.9 MLTX continues to operate at a cash burn well below peers whilst delivering with speed and quality Current cash, cash equivalents and short-term marketable debt securities expected to provide cash runway into the second half of 2027 Amended Hercules facility, adding another $25m to the balance sheet and providing up to $400m in additional non- dilutive funds, i.e. supporting cash needs well into commercialization (see next page) Cash position1, USD m Cash position by quarter, in USD m Impact from equity raise Impact from first tranche of debt facility Cash position excluding debt facility impact 1 Including Cash, Cash Equivalents and Short-term Marketable Debt Securities; 2 USD 75m less Legal and Accounting fees, as well as underwriting commissions
Page 44
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX 511.0 547.1 MoonLake Corporate 44 Finance: OpEx stabilized at ~$65m/quarter (incl. non-cash expense) Operating expenses stabilized at around $65m per quarter which includes non-cash expense such as share-based compensation R&D expense now beyond the peak: VELA-I and VELA-II concluding soon; LEDA and S- OLARIS completed; PPP Phase 3 to be initiated but significantly smaller than VELA G&A expense reduced in Q4 due to implemented efficiency measures; increases expected for pre-commercial activities Operating expense by quarter, in USD m 40.4 9.2 Q4-2024 36.5 11.0 Q1-2025 49.8 10.9 Q2-2025 60.6 10.8 Q3-2025 56.0 9.2 Q4-2025 49.6 47.5 60.7 71.4 65.2 R&D G&A
Page 45
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX Updated Cost of capital MoonLake Corporate 45 Finance: We amended the debt facility to fund future growth $75m Closing of loan facility Drawn March 2025 $125m Primary endpoint of VELA-1 and VELA-2 Phase 3 studies $50m Primary endpoint of IZAR-1 and IZAR-2 Phase 3 studies $50m FDA accepted the BLA submission $200m Additional capital that can be drawn 1 X 8.45% cash interest rate2,3 0.25% reduction upon BLA acceptance by FDA Original facility terms (Mar 2025) Full flexibility No obligation to future tranches $25m Closing of amendment Feb 2026 $50m Clinically meaningful improvement of VELA-1 and VELA-2 at W52, minimum market cap $1.5B $100m FDA approved the BLA application $200m Additional capital that can be drawn 1 Updated facility terms (Feb 2026) $75m Closing of loan facility Drawn March 2025 $50m Primary endpoint of IZAR-1 and IZAR-2 Phase 3 studies 1 Subject to approval by Hercules Capital in alignment with MLTX; 2 WSJ Prime rate + 1.45%, with 8.45% as floor; 3 facility, end-of-term and prepayment charges apply as disclosed in 8 -K filing, prepayment charge timeline renewed following amendment. Commercial readiness Adjustment of tranches for same cost of capital allowing MLTX to start commercialization through debt facility
Page 46
© 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX Closing Remarks 46
Page 47
Source: © 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TXMoonLake Corporate Recap: An active catalyst flow for MLTX is expected in 2026 47 FDA interaction Trial data All future milestones are anticipated dates 2026 up to 60 days ▪ IZAR-2: Ph3 PE read- out ▪ P-OLARIS: Interim read- out IZAR-1: Ph3 PE read-out IZAR-1 Q1 Q4 IZAR-2 Derm event Rheum event AAD VELA HS: Pre-BLA meeting (early April, procedural) CMC pre-BLA (early May) PPP: FDA meeting VELA-TEEN EULAR EADVHS BLA submission VELA-TEEN VELA SHSA/ACR VELA-TEEN: BLA data cut S-OLARIS: PE read-out VELA VELA: Ph3 Wk 52 read-out VELA Mid-year HS BLA acceptance (expected) Focus of today Timeline not scaled
Page 48
© 2026 | Proprietary | MoonLake TX Q & A 48