OBJECTIVES: After decades of free pharmaceutical pricing, Germany introduced binding rebate negotiations between manufacturers and Statutory Health Insurance funds in 2011. Negotiations are based on early benefit assessments by the Federal Joint Committee. We aim to analyze whether early benefit assessments can be a basis for value-based pricing. We analyze four approaches to systematically compute prices instead of negotiating. METHODS: A drug’s additional benefit over a specific comparator is assessed separately for each indication (including number of patients). Benefit is rated as: less, unproven, unquantified, small, significant, or substantial. We analyze four models for quantifying the discrete benefit levels and weighting of each indication. To illustrate the effects, we use data from Ticagrelor’s early benefit assessment. RESULTS: Application of the models to Ticagrelor results in prices from 141 € to 579 €. All prices are adjusted to match the dose required per patient per year. For all models, the most important factor is the comparator (as determined by the Federal Joint Committee). Assuming Prasugrel as the comparator for all indications (instead of Clopidogrel and Aspirin), the results range from 953 € to 3004 €. As the case of Ticagrelor shows, an early benefit assessment might not recognize any additional benefit for some indications. Therefore, the impact of the benefit levels less, unproven, and unquantified on the computation of the price is important. CONCLUSIONS: Early benefit assessments deliver sufficient information for systematic pharmaceutical pricing. The results of all models applied are plausible, assuming Clopidogrel’s price of 139 € and Ticagrelor's undiscounted price of 1092 € as boundaries. Pricing results, however, are dependent on the prices of the comparators. As the comparators have not been subject to early benefit assessments, pricing remains arbitrary with regard to the drug’s value.