Investor Presentation | October 2019

2019-CRC-013 Forward-Looking Statements and Where to Find More Information

To the extent that statements contained in this presentation are not descriptions of historical facts regarding Foamix, they are forward-looking statements reflecting management’s current beliefs and expectations. Forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause our or our industry’s actual results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements to be materially different from those anticipated by such statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” “intends,” or “continue,” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. Forward-looking statements contained in this presentation include, but are not limited to, (i) statements regarding the timing of anticipated clinical trials for our product candidates; (ii) the timing of receipt of clinical data for our product candidates; (iii) our expectations regarding the potential safety, efficacy, or clinical utility of our product candidates; (iv) the size of patient populations targeted by our product candidates and market adoption of our product candidates by physicians and patients; (v) the timing or likelihood of regulatory filings and approvals; and (vi) our revenues under our agreements with our licensees, including LEO Pharma and other companies.

Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, various factors may cause differences between our expectations and actual results, including, but not limited to, unexpected safety or efficacy data, unexpected side effects observed during preclinical studies or in clinical trials, lower than expected enrollment rates in clinical trials, changes in expected or existing competition, unexpected delays in, or the ability to obtain regulatory approval for, our product candidates, changes in the regulatory environment for our product candidates and our need for future capital, the inability to protect our intellectual property, and the risk that we become a party to unexpected litigation or other disputes.

Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements publicly, or to update the reasons why actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements, even if new information becomes available in the future.

You should read the documents filed by Foamix with the SEC, including our most recent annual and quarterly reports and prospectuses, including in each case the Risk Factors set forth therein. You may obtain those documents by visiting EDGAR on the SEC website at www.sec.gov or on our website at www.foamix.com under the heading “Investors.”

Foamix uses its website (www.foamix.com) as a channel to distribute information about Foamix and its product candidates. Foamix encourages investors to visit our website from time to time, as information is updated and new information is posted in addition to following its press releases, SEC filings, public conference calls, and webcasts.

The trademarks included herein are the property of the owners thereof and are used for reference purposes only. Such use should not be construed as an endorsement of the foam technology or product candidates of Foamix.

2 Foamix: Thinking Differently About Dermatology Mission: Improve the lives of patients by developing and commercializing proprietary, innovative and differentiated drugs in dermatology and beyond.

Targeting the most Pursuing innovative treatments Challenging the status quo and difficult problems to address high unmet needs reimagining what’s possible

World’s first topical Cracking the code on indication Guided by our culture minocycline-based therapies in specific topical medicine innovation Proven team with long standing late stage development Innovation platform: R&D + commercial experience 2 late stage product candidates Molecular Stabilizing Technology Large market opportunities

3 Commercial Team with Experienced Launch Capabilities Launch experience in numerous therapeutic classes including:

• Dermatology • CNS • Hematology • Women’s Health • Sleep • Immunology • Urology • Allergy • Infectious Disease • Pain • Diabetes • Oncology • Cardiovascular • Gastroenterology

Dermatology Product Launches:

4 Late Stage Pipeline with Two Potential Launches 2019-20

Product Candidate Preclinical Phase 2 Phase 3 NDA Filed Milestones

FMX101 Phase 3 double-blind studies completed Long-term safety study completed (4% minocycline foam) NDA filed December 2018 for Moderate-Severe Acne PDUFA October 20, 2019

FMX103 Phase 3 double-blind studies completed Long-term safety study completed (1.5% minocycline foam) NDA filed August 2019 for Moderate-Severe Rosacea PDUFA anticipated mid 2020

FCD105 3 week dermal toxicity complete 12 week dermal toxicity started Apr 2019 (3% minocycline + 0.3% adapalene foam) Phase 2 initiated Sept 2019 for Moderate-Severe Acne TLR anticipated mid 2020

Safety and efficacy of these investigational products have not been established. There is no guarantee that these products wi ll receive FDA approval or become commercially available.

5 Minocycline is Well Established as an Global prevalence of antibiotic resistance to P. acnes Efficacious Acne Treatment

Minocycline (Est. 1972): Broad-spectrum bacteriostatic antibiotic commonly used for the treatment of acne vulgaris Only available in orally administered formulation

Minocycline is known for its efficacy in treating acne: Anti-inflammatory mechanism Impact on Corynebacterium acnes Systemic related side effects may limit Minocycline shows the least propensity among antibiotics broader use to developing resistance, worldwide1 Topical administration challenge: Minocycline degrades rapidly in the presence of water and protic solvents No topical formulation feasible for nearly 50 years Source: (1) Sardana K, et al. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2015;13:883-896; P. acnes=Propionibacterium acnes; TCN-R=tetracycline-resistant 6 Molecule Stabilizing Technology (MST)™ Novel Molecule Stabilizing Technology (MST)™ Delivery

• Stabilizes hydrophobic molecules

• Surfactant & irritant free formulation maintains barrier function, improves tolerability and compliance1

• Low mechanical sheer enhances spreadability

• Being investigated to deliver unstable drugs that have proven difficult to formulate topically

• Oil-based excipients may instigate sebum dissolution2

• Targets delivery of minocycline directly into the pilosebaceous unit 2

7 (1) Hazot Y, et al. J Anal Pharm Res. 2017;4(5):00117. (2) Data on file. FMX101 MINOCYCLINE TOPICAL FOAM 4% CLINICAL RESULTS

8 FMX101 PK Profile Compared to oral minocycline

fold lower blood Skin levels of FMX101 was concentration than the oral observed to be ~70X ~800 minocycline comparator ~70X higher than comparator

Skin (epidermis) Cmax (mcg/g)

600 560

500

400

300

200

100 Mean Plasma Minocycline Concentration-Time Profiles in 24 8 Hours: Oral Minocycline, Period 1, and FMX101, Period 2, 0 Intensive Sampling Periods, Linear Scale FMX101 Oral Minocycline

9 Source: Foamix clinical study FX2014-03 FMX101 Clinical Results: Lesion Count Phase 3 Co-primary endpoint: Absolute Change of Inflammatory Lesion Count at Week 12

Study 22 Study 05

-10.72 -13.40 -13.46

-16.93

P<0.01

P<0.0001 FMX101,4% Vehicle

10 ANCOVA, ITT population, multiple imputation FMX101 Clinical Results: Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) Phase 3 Co-primary endpoint: IGA Treatment Success at Week 12 [Score Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1)]

50% FMX101,4% Vehicle

P<0.0001 40%

30% 30.8% P<0.0001

20% 19.6%

Treatment Success 14.7%

10% % of SubjectsAchieving 7.9%

0% Study 22 Study 05

11 ANCOVA, ITT population, multiple imputation FMX101 Clinical Results: Patient Examples

Study Study FX2014-05 FX2017-22

Baseline Week 12 Baseline Week 12

12 Study 22 TEAE Frequency (%) TEAE FMX101, 4% Vehicle One or more 26.2 24.5 FMX101 Safety Results URTI 4.2 3.5 in Study ‘22 and ’05 Viral URTI 2.2 2.9 CK increased 1.9 0.8 Non-cutaneous TEAEs in Influenza 1.5 0.5 descending frequency occurring Study 22 SAEs (FMX101, 4%): Spontaneous abortion (1) / Study 05 SAEs (FMX101, 4%): Asthma (1), I in at least 1% of subjects in ntestinal obstruction/perforation (1), bone fracture (1), ectopic pregnancy (1) either group Study 05 TEAE Frequency (%)

• No treatment related SAEs were TEAE FMX101, 4% Vehicle identified in either study. One or more 33.0 26.5 Nasopharyngitis 7.2 3.7 • In total, 9 subjects discontinued Headache in Studies 22 and 05 due to a 6.0 5.6 TEAE URTI 1.8 1.2 Ligament Sprain 1.8 0.6 ▪ 5 in the FMX101 treatment CK increased 1.5 2.5 groups Nausea 1.2 0.6 ▪ 4 in the vehicle treatment Vomiting 1.2 0.6 groups.

URI – Upper Respiratory Tract Infection SAE – Serious Adverse Event CK – Creatine Kinase 13 FMX101 Safety FMX101 Safety in Phase 3: Local Tolerability Assessments at Week 12, Scale 0 (none) to 3 (severe)

of signs and symptoms were >95% classified as “none” or “mild”

FMX101 (n=737) – n (%) Vehicle Foam (n=747) – n (%) Study 22 Assessment* 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 =None =Mild =Moderate =Severe =None =Mild =Moderate =Severe 11 0 98 11 0 Erythema 515 (82.7) 100 (16.0) 514 (82.5) (1.8) (0.0) (15.7) (1.8) (0.0) 53 5 0 550 68 4 1 Dryness 568 (90.7) (8.5) (0.8) (0.0) (88.3) (10.9) (0.6) (0.2) 75 14 1 90 17 1 Hyperpigmentation† 536 (85.6) 515 (82.7) (12.0) (2.2) (0.2) (14.4) (2.7) (0.2) 18 1 0 33 2 1 Skin Peeling 607 (97.0) 587 (94.2) (2.9) (0.2) (0.0) (5.3) (0.3) (0.2) 30 7 1 40 6 0 Itching 588 (93.9) 577 (92.6) (4.8) (1.1) (0.2) (6.4) (1.0) (0.0)

• Results consistent with studies FX2014-04 and FX2014-05.

14 * Based on safety population †The term hyperpigmentation was most commonly used to describe localized post -inflammatory darkening of the affected skin. FMX103 MINOCYCLINE TOPICAL FOAM 1.5% CLINICAL RESULTS FMX103 Clinical Results: Lesion Count Phase 3 Co-primary endpoint: Absolute Change of Inflammatory Lesion Count at Week 12

Study 11 Study 12 0 -2 N=495 N=256 N=514 N=257 -4 -6 -8 -10 -12 -14.88 -14 -15.65 -16 -17.57 -18.54 -18 Lesions from Baseline -20

-22 Mean Reduction in Inflammatory -24 P<0.005 P<0.0001 FMX103 Vehicle

16 ANCOVA, ITT population, multiple imputation FMX101 Clinical Results: Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) Phase 3 Co-primary endpoint: IGA Treatment Success at Week 12 [Score Clear (0) or Almost Clear (1)]

80% FMX103 Vehicle P<0.005 70% P<0.01 60%

50% 52.1% 49.1% 40% 43.0% 39.0% 30%

20% % of Subjects Achieving % of Subjects

Treatment Success Treatment (IGA0/1) 10%

0% Study 11 Study 12

17 ANCOVA, ITT population, multiple imputation FMX103 Clinical Results: Erythema Clinical Erythema Assessments From Baseline to Week 12 by Visit FMX103 1.5% Safety Population

Study 11 Study 12 100%

90% 19 18 21 23 28 30 33 80% 41 70% 63 65 33 60% 40 39 48 50% 44 51 40% 47 46 30% 36 33 40% 28 47% 29 20% 28 clear or clear or 27 almost 23 almost 10% 16 16

10 clear clear Subjects With Erythema By Severity (%) Severity By Erythema With Subjects

Subjects With Erythema By Severity (%) Severity By Erythema With Subjects 5 0% 5 Baseline Week 2 Week 4 Week 8 Week 12 Baseline Week 2 Week 4 Week 8 Week 12

0 – Clear skin 1 – Almost clear 2 – Mild 3 – Moderate 4 – Severe

18 FMX103 Clinical Results: Patient Examples

Study Study FX2016-11 FX2016-12

Baseline Week 12 Baseline Week 12

19 Study 11 TEAE Frequency (%) TEAE FMX103, 1.5% Vehicle One or more 18.4 21.1 FMX103 Safety in URTI 0.8 2.0 Viral URTI 1.8 1.6 Studies ‘11 and ’12 UTI 1.0 1.6 Headache 0.6 1.6 Non-cutaneous TEAEs in Hypertension 1.2 0.8 descending frequency occurring Fall 0.0 1.2 Concussion 0.0 1.2

in at least 1% of subjects in Study 11 SAEs (FMX103, 1.5%): Nausea, chest discomfort, fatigue, seasonal allergy, dehydration, syncope, dyspnea. either group Study 12 SAEs (FMX103, 1.5%): Hypertension

Study 12 TEAE Frequency (%) • No serious treatment-related TEAE FMX103, 1.5% Vehicle adverse events reported in One or more 24.1 26.1 either study URTI 2.9 3.1 Viral URTI 2.9 3.1 • 9 subjects across both studies Headache 2.1 2.3 discontinued due to a TEAE Sinusitis 1.4 0.8 ▪ 7 in the FMX103 treatment Influenza 1.0 1.2 groups Diarrhea 1.2 0.8 UTI 0.6 1.2 ▪ 2 in the vehicle groups Fatigue 0.4 1.2 Vomiting 1.0 0.4

URI – Upper Respiratory Tract Infection SAE – Serious Adverse Event UTI – Urinary Tract Infection 20 Study 11 Study 12 FMX103 1.5% Vehicle Foam FMX103 1.5% Vehicle Foam (n=494) (n=256) (n=514) (n=257) Cutaneous AEs, n (%) Rosacea Phase 3 Pruritus 4 (0.8) 0 (0.0) 3 (0.6) 1 (0.4) Dermatitis 2 (0.4) 0 (0.0) 2 (0.4) 1 (0.4) Results: Safety Dermatitis contact 2 (0.4) 0 (0.0) - - Rash 1 (0.2) 1 (0.4) 4 (0.8) 1 (0.4) Cutaneous Treatment Actinic keratosis 1 (0.2) 1 (0.4) - - Emergent Adverse Event Dermal cyst 1 (0.2) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.2) 0 (0.0) Hyperpigmentation 1 (0.2) 0 (0.0) - - (TEAE) Frequency Hand dermatitis 1 (0.2) 0 (0.0) - - Nail discoloration 0 (0.0) 1 (0.4) 1 (0.2) 1 (0.4) Erythema 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.2) 0 (0.0) Hair color change - - 1 (0.2) 0 (0.0) Telangiectasia - - 1 (0.2) 0 (0.0) Cutaneous TEAEs occurred in Ingrowing nail - - 1 (0.2) 0 (0.0) Skin exfoliation 0 (0.0) 1 (0.4) - - <1% of subjects Skin irritation - - - - in the FMX103 treatment groups Onycholysis - - 0 (0.0) 1 (0.4) Rosacea 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.2) 1 (0.4) Seborrheic dermatitis - - 0 (0.0) 1 (0.4)

21 Commercial FMX101 Market Entry Overview

Market Differentiation Smart Consumer Comprehensive Factors Deployment Approach Access

Vehicle technology Claims data analytics Generation Z Ensure broad access (13-24 year old) focus Minocycline potency Acne patient Manage corporate concentrations Digital marketing opportunities gross-to-net Resistance profile Brand adoption Limited competitive Limit Patient Systemic absorption investment Out-of- pocket burden

23 Acne Market Size1

Brand vs. Generic Acne Brand vs. Generic Acne TRx Volume 2018 $ Volume 2018

18M $5.2B

Generic Brand Generic Brand 12.9M 71% 5.2M 29% $1.7B 33% $3.4B 67%

24 Source: (1) Symphony Health Solutions PHAST, data ending DEC’18- weighted Launch Surrogates in Acne Launches in the acne market over time have yielded positive first year uptake, averaging ~295k prescriptions. Year three average was ~564k.

Acne Launch Surrogate Year 1 and Year 3 TRx Volume Year 1 Year 3 1,000,000 917,265 900,000 800,000 709,123 700,000 600,000 561,882 500,000 425,728 407,585 400,000 329,687 279,657 300,102 300,000 230,110 200,000 131,138 100,000 0 Acanya Aczone 7.5% Epiduo Forte Onexton Solodyn

25 Source: Symphony Health Solutions PHAST Seysara US TRx Volume 30,000 27,570 26,049 25,000 Recent Acne Launch 21,975 20,914 Highlights Demand 20,000 for New Products 16,713 15,000 Sarecycline, a systemic oral 12,367 antibiotic for acne, was launched in January 2019. It has had durable 10,000 7,019 growth over time, which signals market need and acceptance of 5,000 novel antibiotic agents. 1,193 0 Jan-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Apr-19 May-19 Jun-19 Jul-19 Aug-19

Source: Symphony Health Solutions PHAST 26 FMX101

FMX101 Market Position FMX101 draws from known DIFFERENTIATORS attributes of topical acne products and oral tetracyclines, with unique Expected to be 1st topical minocycline differentiated features. Novel MST ™ delivery Natural moisturizing formulation Favorable resistance profile

Low systemic Proven Efficacy absorption Trusted No impact to GI molecule TOPICAL ORAL PRODUCTS TETRACYCLINES

27 Source: Symphony Health Solutions PHAST FMX101 Targeting Approach Patient Claims based targeting strategy enables Foamix to narrow the acne diagnosing HCP field from >170k to a select ~6k providers (3%) while capturing the majority of the promotable TRx and Patient market volumes.±.

3% Patient Claims Based Targeting Strategy 67% Focusing on select HCPs that Acne Sufferers can deliver significant impact at ~6k launch. Prioritized via choice HCP screening measures: Target List • acne diagnosed patient volume >170k • acne TRx volume • preference for a brand 97% vs. generic 73% Acne • early adoption preference TRx

28 ±Source: Symphony Integrated Dataverse (IDV) Patient Claims Database, Time Period: 24 months ending Feb ‘19 Geographic Distribution of Patient Volume Using patient concentrations, certain states such as New York, Texas, Florida and Ohio yield high volume opportunities.

Distribution of Targeted Diagnosed Patients across US States

29 Acne Vulgaris Patients: Age and Severity 21-24 19% Highly concentrated patient population, with >75% of the acne vulgaris patient population aged 13-24 , which we believe 25-28 is a market that can be mobilized efficiently 8% and effectively. 17-20 29-32 32% 3% Acne Vulgaris Patients 33-36 Target Demographic: Generation Z by Age Group 3% 37-40 • Born between 1995-2005 3% • Average 7 hours per day consuming media 41+ • Mobile accounts for 50-65% of media 4% consumption 9-12 3% • Top Social platforms: Instagram, Twitter and Snapchat • 85% use smartphone multiple times per day 13-16 • Spend more time on Netflix and YouTube vs. 25% traditional television

30 Source: Syneos TreatmentAnswers Database, 2019. Access Objectives

Broad Payer Coverage Patient Retention Profitable Approach

Secure ‘traditional’ formulary coverage and Avoid abandonment by supporting Manage contracting and copay avoid exclusion lists commercial patients facing considerable investments to ensure profitability economic exposure

31 Payer Reaction to FMX101 Profile

Key Insights High-level Price-Access • Overall stakeholders had a favorable reaction to the target product profile (TPP) for FMX101. $600 • FMX101 is not viewed as a simple reformulation but as Highly restricted/ Not $500 a novel route of administration. covered

• Key clinical advantages noted were lower risk of systemic $400 side effects given the topical formulation and less exposure $300 due to lower dose. SE or simple PA $200 • Payers said this was not analogous to several current

Non-preferred Net Price Net perMonth products with poor differentiation and price in excess of $100 perceived value. $0 • At the <$400 net price per month range, FMX101 would Preferred have access without highly restrictive PAs or step edits.

32 Source: N=10 stakeholders representing >230m covered lives interviews conducted by Syneos Health in December 2018. Rosacea Market Size1

Brand vs. Generic Rosacea Brand vs. Generic Rosacea TRx Volume 2018 $ Volume 2018

5M $1.2B

Generic Brand Generic Brand 3.4M 72% 1.3M 28% $454.8M 37% $759.2M 63%

33 Source: (1) Symphony Health Solutions PHAST, data ending DEC’18- weighted Rosacea Launch Surrogates Launches in the rosacea market over time have yielded and average of ~192k prescriptions in the first year. Year three ~312k.

Rosacea Launch Surrogate Year 1 and Year 3 TRx Volume 600,000 515,334 500,000

400,000 347,301

300,000 239,119 240,432 245,517 242,775

200,000 155,791 146,655

100,000 80,293

0 Finacea Topical Foam Mirvaso Oracea Rhofade Soolantra Year 1 Year 3

34 Source: Symphony Health Solutions PHAST FMX103 Targeting More than half of Acne targets will also be Rosacea targets while others will be added to the target universe.

Acne Physician count Rosacea Physician count 50% Targets ~ 6k HCPs Targets ~ 4k HCPs of Acne targets will also be Rosacea targets Remaining Acne Remaining Acne >170k HCPs >100k HCPs Universe Universe

35 Source: Symphony Health Solutions IDV Vantage, October 2018. FMX101 & FMX103 Synergies The launch of FMX103 will leverage much of the infrastructure used to launch FMX101, reducing the need for additional investments.

Shared Services Sales Force Convention Advertising Media Purchasing FMX101 Specific Internal Infrastructure FMX103 Specific Sample Management Advertising and Promotion Advertising and Promotion Trade and Distribution Apparatus Data Purchasing Field Reimbursement Team Field Medical Team Medical Communications

36 Investor Presentation | October 2019

2019-CRC-013