Biofarma – South African trademarks
Updated 8 November 2026
Biofarma is part of the French pharmaceutical group Servier, whose medicines focus on cardiovascular and metabolic diseases, cancer and neurology.
How Biofarma has built and protected its brands in South Africa – its trademark portfolio, where it expanded, how quickly its marks are registered, and who it competes with.
Download report (PDF)Biofarma trademarks in 45 seconds
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/biofarma-south-african-trademarks/overview-video.html
A portfolio built over time
Biofarma filed its first South African trademark in 1964 and has filed 321 since; its busiest year was 2008, with 26 new filings. The chart shows its filings per year from 1970.
Trademarks by filing year, up to 2024; applications still pending are not included.
The names behind the portfolio
Over the years the group has filed under several names – earlier company names, holding companies and subsidiaries. We count them together.
| Name | Marks | Filing years |
|---|---|---|
| Biofarma | 323 | 1964–2025 |
Where Biofarma expanded its business
Trademark classes show what a business sells. Biofarma's portfolio is concentrated in pharmaceuticals (class 5), tech & it services (class 42), medical devices (class 10). Its most recent moves were into electronics & software (2016), medical devices (2015), medical & beauty care (2005).
Biofarma trademarks: expansion into trademark classes, 1970–2025
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/biofarma-south-african-trademarks/class-expansion-video.html
Each tile is a class; it lights up when the group first files in it and darkens with more filings; the dots show how many of its closest rivals also file in that class. The chart compares the number of classes used with its rivals. The video runs from 1970; classes entered earlier are lit from the start.
| Class | Marks | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 Pharmaceuticals | 284 | 88.5% | 1964 |
| 42 Tech & IT services | 12 | 3.7% | 1997 |
| 10 Medical devices | 9 | 2.8% | 2015 |
| 44 Medical & beauty care | 4 | 1.2% | 2005 |
| 9 Electronics & software | 3 | 0.9% | 2016 |
| 41 Education & entertainment | 3 | 0.9% | 1996 |
| 3 Cosmetics & cleaning | 2 | 0.6% | 1970 |
| 35 Advertising & retail | 2 | 0.6% | 2005 |
The brands Biofarma protects most
The word marks and logo names Biofarma has filed most often – the same brand filed in more classes, in more versions or again over the years.
| # | Brand | Trademarks | Classes | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CARDIOSKIN | 3 | 3 | 2016–2016 |
| 2 | HOMEHEART | 3 | 3 | 2018–2018 |
| 3 | DAFLON | 2 | 2 | 1977–2013 |
| 4 | GLISSIDIA | 2 | 2 | 2016–2016 |
| 5 | INXITU | 2 | 2 | 2015–2015 |
| 6 | LUNIQIA | 2 | 2 | 2015–2015 |
| 7 | OBEONE | 2 | 2 | 2016–2016 |
| 8 | OBLONE | 2 | 2 | 2015–2015 |
| 9 | PERFORM | 2 | 2 | 2005–2005 |
| 10 | QUALIOST | 2 | 2 | 1997–1997 |
| 11 | SKINPULSE | 2 | 2 | 2016–2016 |
| 12 | UNISMOSE | 2 | 2 | 2015–2015 |
| 13 | ADIFAX | 2 | 1 | 1986–1991 |
| 14 | CORALAN | 2 | 1 | 1998–2004 |
| 15 | MUPHORAN | 2 | 1 | 1988–1993 |
Logos filed most often (since 2020)
Biofarma's logos
The 1 different logos Biofarma has had published since 2020 – each logo shown once, however many classes or versions it was filed in. Logos protected in more classes come first.
How quickly its trademarks are registered
Over the last five years, Biofarma's marks took a median of 1.5 years from filing to registration, faster than the market's 2.7 years. Most of that time is examination: 0.8 years from filing to acceptance (market: 1.9). Registration itself follows about half a year after acceptance.
Median years from filing to registration per registration year, split into examination (filing → acceptance) and acceptance → registration; the dashed line is the market median. A high recent value means older applications came through that year.
Who files the most in Biofarma's classes
Ranked by number of trademarks filed in Biofarma's main classes – any company that files there, whatever else it does (including retailers' own brands). This shows Biofarma's market position, not who is most like it.
In the last five years, Biofarma was #63 of 2,050 filers in class 5 (pharmaceuticals), with 13 of 6,111 trademarks.
Biofarma's share of all trademarks filed in each of its main classes, per filing year.
Top trademark filers in class 5 (pharmaceuticals), South Africa 1975–2024: Biofarma
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/biofarma-south-african-trademarks/class-5-race-video.html
Main competitors – the companies most like Biofarma
Ranked by how similar their whole trademark portfolio is to Biofarma's – the same mix of classes and the same words in their marks – not by size. Large filers in its classes that do something different rank lower here.
Biofarma's closest competitors in South Africa are Bayer, H Lundbeck, Biontech and GSK.
Biofarma trademarks vs competitors: filings per year, 2010–2024
Watch the video on its own page, with transcript – https://snz.co.za/trademark-country-selection-direct/biofarma-south-african-trademarks/competitors-video.html
Trademark filings per year: Biofarma (orange) and its five closest competitors.
| # | Company | Relationship | Similarity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bayer | Direct competitor | 70% |
| 2 | H Lundbeck | Direct competitor | 70% |
| 3 | Biontech | Direct competitor | 70% |
| 4 | GSK | Direct competitor | 70% |
| 5 | Novo Nordisk | Direct competitor | 70% |
| 6 | Novartis | Direct competitor | 69% |
| 7 | Reckitt | 70% | |
| 8 | Ecolab | 70% | |
| 9 | Kenvue | 70% | |
| 10 | Lion Match Company | 70% |
Similarity of trademark activity since 2015 (classes and words used in marks). Retailers appear where their own brands compete on the shelf.
Biofarma – relevant export countries
South Africa exported US$1.6 billion of the goods Biofarma's main classes cover in the last year – pharmaceutical preparations; dietary supplements; pharmaceutical products; disinfectants (class 5); medical devices; suture materials; medical instruments; surgical (class 10); computer software; software; computer hardware (class 9); cosmetics; essential oils; perfumes (class 3). Combining where these goods are exported, imported, growing and made (and copied), and what protection costs, these are the markets where Biofarma's trademarks matter most.
Adjust the weightings
These weightings decide how the countries below are ranked. Change any value and the others adjust to keep the total at 100%.
Worldwide
| # | Market | Score | SA exports | Import growth / yr | Route | Cost, 4 classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | European Union | 77 | US$135 m | +3% | National | US$2,123 |
| 2 | United States of America | 75 | US$72 m | +4% | National | US$2,750 |
| 3 | United Kingdom | 67 | US$39 m | -1% | National | US$1,192 |
| 4 | Japan | 62 | US$12 m | +0% | National | US$1,481 |
| 5 | Australia | 60 | US$41 m | -4% | National | US$2,020 |
| 6 | Canada | 59 | US$7.6 m | -2% | National | US$1,907 |
| 7 | Hong Kong SAR | 58 | US$3.8 m | +11% | National | US$1,412 |
| 8 | Namibia | 57 | US$201 m | +13% | ARIPO | US$397 |
| 9 | Türkiye | 56 | US$7.9 m | +4% | National | US$1,119 |
| 10 | Zimbabwe | 54 | US$152 m | +15% | ARIPO | US$397 |
Africa
| # | Market | Score | SA exports | Import growth / yr | Route | Cost, 4 classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Namibia | 57 | US$201 m | +13% | ARIPO | US$397 S&Z |
| 2 | Zimbabwe | 54 | US$152 m | +15% | ARIPO | US$397 S&Z |
| 3 | Botswana | 52 | US$183 m | -6% | ARIPO | US$397 S&Z |
| 4 | Nigeria | 50 | US$20 m | -10% | National | US$812 S&Z |
| 5 | OAPI (17 states) | 49 | US$21 m | +6% | National | US$1,378 S&Z |
| 6 | Egypt | 48 | US$3.2 m | -0% | National | US$1,835 |
| 7 | Malawi | 47 | US$37 m | +17% | ARIPO | US$397 S&Z |
| 8 | Mozambique | 47 | US$76 m | +4% | ARIPO | US$397 S&Z |
| 9 | Morocco | 46 | US$891 k | +10% | National | US$1,224 |
| 10 | Tanzania | 46 | US$17 m | -3% | ARIPO | US$397 S&Z |
SA exports = South Africa's exports of these goods to the market in the last year. Ranked with the default weightings. Score 0–100 from South Africa's exports of the goods to the market, net imports, import growth, foreign trademark filings, where the goods are made, market size and the cost of protection. Costs are total fees (official and professional) to file in 4 classes; ARIPO costs are per country, plus US$290 once per ARIPO application; S&Z = S&Z's own all-in price. Goods are taken from the classes and specifications, so the ranking is indicative.
Trade data: CEPII BACI (version 202601, trade flows 2022–2024), Licence Etalab 2.0; aggregated and combined with other data by S&Z.
Protecting its top brands in Nigeria and OAPI with S&Z
| Brand | Classes | Nigeria | OAPI (17 states) |
|---|---|---|---|
| CARDIOSKIN | 3 | US$609 | US$1,194 |
| HOMEHEART | 3 | US$609 | US$1,194 |
| DAFLON | 2 | US$406 | US$1,009 |
| GLISSIDIA | 2 | US$406 | US$1,009 |
| INXITU | 2 | US$406 | US$1,009 |
S&Z all-in prices per brand in its number of classes, filing to registration.
TM Country Selection Rank the countries for your own goods and get the quotes.
Word marks you may have considered opposing
For Biofarma's five most-filed brands: word marks of other companies (not Biofarma's own group) that our similar word mark search, SimTM, found in the brand's own classes, and that we consider confusingly similar – from the earliest match found to today.
Similar to CARDIOSKIN (classes 9, 10, 44; searched 2019-01-30 to 2026-11-08)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similar to HOMEHEART (classes 9, 10, 44; no close matches in the search)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found.
Similar to DAFLON (classes 3, 5; no close matches in the search)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found.
Similar to GLISSIDIA (classes 5, 10; searched 2025-05-28 to 2026-11-08)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similar to INXITU (classes 5, 10; searched 2019-04-24 to 2026-11-08)
No confusingly similar marks of other companies found in this period.
Similarity of the words only. Whether a mark could have been opposed depends on the goods and services, the reputation of the brand and the facts – S&Z can advise. New marks like these are what SimTM watch reports as they are published.
How S&Z can help you
S&Z does not just file trademarks. We are a technology-first firm that manages trademarks – analysing your data, monitoring competitors and making sure your trademark assets remain protected.
We manage your trademarks – not just file them
Analysing your data, monitoring competitors and making sure your trademark assets remain protected:
Filing and renewal at fixed, all-inclusive prices
S&Z prices – South African trademarks
| Filing, first class – incl. official fee, examination report, routine office action, acceptance, publication, registration and e-certificate | US$240 |
| Each additional class of the same mark, filed at the same time | US$225 |
| Renewal online, per class (every 10 years from filing) | R1,027 ≈ US$62.29 |
Renewal in rand; US$ at R16.49 per US$.
Biofarma's next five years of renewals
98 of Biofarma's registered marks reach their ten-year renewal date in 2027–2031. Renewed online with S&Z, that costs about US$6,104 over the five years.
Biofarma: frequently asked questions
What should Biofarma consider for its trademarks?
- Where to file next: its goods sell strongly in Namibia, Zimbabwe and Botswana – markets where South African exports of the same goods are large or growing, and where S&Z files at its own all-in prices (see “Biofarma – relevant export countries”).
- Possible gaps: its competitors also protect class 1 (chemicals), class 36 (finance & insurance) – worth checking against what the business sells or plans to sell.
- Brand coverage: Daflon, Glissidia, Inxitu are protected in only one or two classes – check whether related goods or services (for example merchandise or online services) need cover too.
- Fewer new brands: new brand names fell from 7.4 to 2.8 a year – worth reviewing whether planned launches are being protected early enough.
- Renewals and use: keep track of the ten-year renewal dates and of marks that are no longer used – unused marks can be challenged after five years, and some may no longer be worth renewing.