Market evolution: Steroidal hormones (CN 293729) — 2015–2025

Introduction

CN 293729 covers a residual group of steroidal hormones, their derivatives and structural analogues used primarily as hormones, excluding corticosteroids, oestrogens, and progestogens. This product category encompasses high-value active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and intermediates — such as androgens, anabolic steroids, and other hormonal compounds — that serve the pharmaceutical and veterinary industries. Over the 2015–2025 period, the EU's external trade in this product underwent a profound structural transformation: the Union shifted from a position of strong net exporter to one of trade deficit, driven by a sustained collapse in export values, a reorientation of import sources, and notable price dynamics. This report draws on trade data for CN 293729 to identify and explain the principal dynamics shaping this market.

1. From Net Surplus to Trade Deficit: The Structural Erosion of EU Export Competitiveness

1.1 EU exports halved in value while imports held steady

The most striking feature of the 2015–2025 period is the divergence between export and import trajectories. EU exports to non-EU countries fell from €940 million in 2015 to €432 million in 2025 — a decline of 54.1%. Over the same period, export volumes contracted from approximately 217 tonnes to 132 tonnes (−39.0%). The peak export year saw values reach €1.39 billion, implying that the decline from the apex was even steeper — roughly 69%.

Imports, by contrast, proved far more resilient. The value of EU imports rose modestly from €480 million to €508 million (+5.8%), while quantities increased from 231 tonnes to 263 tonnes (+13.7%).

The EU's trade balance swung from a surplus of €460 million in 2015 to a deficit of €76 million in 2025, having troughed at −€213 million in an intermediate year. This reversal — a change of −116.5% — marks a fundamental shift in the EU's competitive position in this specialised pharmaceutical segment.

1.2 Unit prices declined faster on the export side

The erosion was not purely volumetric. EU export unit values fell from €4.34 million per tonne in 2015 to €3.26 million per tonne in 2025 (−24.8%), while import unit values declined more gently from €2.08 million to €1.93 million per tonne (−7.1%). The persistently higher export unit values compared to import unit values — roughly a 2:1 ratio — are consistent with the EU specialising in higher-value-added formulations or downstream products while importing bulk APIs or intermediates at lower unit costs. However, the narrowing of this gap suggests competitive pressure on EU export pricing or a compositional shift toward lower-value exports.

1.3 EU-level production data signals a dramatic expansion — or a reporting discontinuity

According to the production data, EU production in gross tonnage rose from 619 million GT in 2015 to 40 billion GT in 2025 (+6,364.9%), and production value surged from €1.09 billion to €24 billion (+2,102.4%). These figures are extraordinarily large relative to trade flows and likely reflect a reclassification, the inclusion of new product codes within the CN residual heading, or a step-change in reporting methodology rather than a genuine expansion of output. The net import reliance ratio accordingly collapsed from +64.3% (import-dependent) to −34.9% (net self-sufficient), but this metric should be interpreted with caution given the apparent production data discontinuity.

2. A Reconfigured Trade Geography: Diversified Imports, Concentrated Export Losses

2.1 China and Taiwan emerged as dominant import sources

The geography of EU imports shifted dramatically toward Asia over the period:

The United States remained the single largest import source in 2025 at €236 million, but its share declined markedly from the 2015 level of €339 million (−30.5%). China more than doubled its shipments to the EU, rising from €68 million to €139 million (+102.9%). The most dramatic shift, however, came from Taiwan: EU imports from Taiwan surged from a negligible €2 million in 2015 to €64 million in 2025 — a staggering increase of 2,821.8%. This suggests a significant relocation or expansion of API manufacturing capacity in Taiwan, or the emergence of new supplier relationships for specific steroidal compounds.

The concentration of imports by value (HHI) fell from 5,695 to 3,175 (−44.2%), confirming a structural diversification of the EU's import base away from US dependency. By contrast, volume-based import concentration increased from 3,642 to 5,173 (+42.0%), suggesting that while value became more evenly distributed, larger bulk shipments became more concentrated among fewer partners — a pattern consistent with the commoditisation of certain API volumes.

2.2 EU exports to the United States collapsed; Canada proved more resilient

The partner profile of EU exports tells a story of contraction across most major destinations:

Exports to the United States — historically the EU's largest single market for these products — plunged by 76.6%, from €281 million to just €66 million. This was the single most consequential factor behind the overall export decline. Canada, by contrast, remained a relatively stable market (€175M → €179M, +2.5%), albeit with significant year-to-year volatility. India (-4.9%) and China (-46.9%) also contracted, while all major Latin American markets declined. The only markets showing modest resilience were Canada and, in absolute terms, India.

2.3 Belgium anchored EU production while Sweden and Ireland exited

Within the EU, member state specialisation remained highly concentrated. Belgium held the strongest revealed comparative advantage (RCA of 7.86, RSCA of 0.77) and accounted for 66.6% of EU production in this product in 2025. Italy ranked second (RCA 1.65, RSCA 0.25), with 13.2% of production.

However, the intra-EU distribution of trade flows underwent significant shifts:

Sweden's exports collapsed from €205 million to €52 million (−74.9%), and Ireland's from €13 million to near zero (−99.9%), effectively removing two historically significant exporters from the map. Italy, conversely, expanded its exports by 71.1% (from €68 million to €116 million), partially compensating for the losses. Belgium — the dominant player — held essentially flat at €186 million, a notable achievement given the overall market contraction.

On the import side, Belgium was again the largest importer (€267M, down 20.5% from €336M), but France (+435.1%), Spain (+281.5%), Germany (+75.7%), and Portugal (+174.5%) all sharply increased their intake, reflecting growing downstream processing demand or supply chain reconfiguration within the EU.

3. Price Shocks, Volatility, and Strategic Vulnerabilities

3.1 Significant price shocks struck key bilateral relationships

The shock detection analysis identified three major abnormal events during the period:

The most consequential shock was the 2023 import price spike from the United States, where unit values jumped by 190.1% with an abnormality score of 34.5 — an extraordinary deviation from trend. Given that US-origin imports accounted for 70.7% of the value stream affected, this event likely reflects a combination of supply tightness, inventory effects, or pharmaceutical pricing dynamics in the US-steroidal hormone supply chain. This shock may have been a catalyst for the EU's accelerating diversification toward Asian suppliers in subsequent periods.

The 2020 price shock in EU-Canada exports (−33.9%) coincides with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and likely reflects demand disruption or compositional shifts in what was shipped to Canada. The 2022 Mexico export price spike (+187.2%), while high in relative terms, affected only 2.1% of export value and had limited macroeconomic impact.

3.2 Volatility varied sharply across trading partners

The coefficient of variation of bilateral trade flows reveals starkly different degrees of stability:

Imports — highest volatility:

Exports — highest volatility:

Taiwan's import CV of 1.94 is consistent with its sudden emergence as a major supplier — the trade flow was near zero in 2015 and surged to €64 million by 2025, creating inherently high variability. The UK's import volatility (CV 2.15) likely reflects post-Brexit supply chain restructuring. On the export side, the EU-China relationship exhibited the highest volatility (CV 1.67), suggesting an erratic or contract-driven trade pattern.

3.3 Export concentration remained moderate; import diversification advanced

Despite the dramatic shifts in partner composition, the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index for exports by value remained relatively stable (from 2,318 to 2,194; −5.3%), indicating that the decline in the US share was offset by a broadening across multiple smaller destinations. The sharp decline in import HHI (from 5,695 to 3,175; −44.2%) was more significant, reflecting the strategic shift away from US concentration toward a more distributed sourcing model that now includes China, Taiwan, India, Mexico, and the UK.

The export propensity of EU production (the share of output exported to non-EU markets) actually increased from 60.1% to 73.3% (+22.1%), suggesting that despite the absolute decline in export values, the EU's remaining production became more export-oriented — a pattern consistent with domestic demand being increasingly met by imports while specialised EU producers focused on external markets.

Conclusion

The EU's trade in CN 293729 steroidal hormones over 2015–2025 was defined by three overarching dynamics. First, a structural erosion of export competitiveness — driven primarily by the collapse of the US market, the decline of Swedish and Irish exporters, and falling unit prices — transformed the EU from a €460-million net exporter into a modest trade deficit position. Second, the import base diversified significantly, with China and especially Taiwan emerging as major suppliers while the US share declined, lowering import concentration by 44%. Third, pronounced price shocks — most notably the 190% US import price spike in 2023 — and high bilateral volatility in emerging trade relationships (Taiwan, Hong Kong, UK) underscore the risks inherent in the ongoing supply chain reconfiguration. Belgium remained the EU's anchor in this product, maintaining stable export volumes and dominant production specialisation. Looking ahead, the sustainability of Italy's export growth, the reliability of the rapidly growing Taiwan supply line, and the evolving pricing dynamics in US-origin imports will be key variables shaping the EU's strategic position in this critical pharmaceutical segment.