Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
LENZ vs KALA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
LENZ vs KALA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $278M | $618K |
| Revenue (TTM) | $19M | $254K |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-82M | $-36M |
| Gross Margin | 97.2% | -3.1% |
| Operating Margin | -477.5% | -150.6% |
| Total Debt | $350K | $32M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $25M | $51M |
LENZ vs KALA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| LENZ Therapeutics, … (LENZ) | 100 | 6.7 | -93.3% |
| KALA BIO, Inc. (KALA) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LENZ vs KALA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LENZ carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- beta 1.78
- -72.4% 10Y total return vs KALA's -100.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.78, Low D/E 0.1%, current ratio 13.80x
KALA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 262.9%, EPS growth 59.8%
- 262.9% revenue growth vs LENZ's -71.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 262.9% revenue growth vs LENZ's -71.5% | |
| Quality / Margins | -430.3% margin vs KALA's -141.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.78 vs KALA's 2.09, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither stock pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | -61.6% vs KALA's -97.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -35.1% ROA vs KALA's -143.2% |
LENZ vs KALA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LENZ leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LENZ is the larger business by revenue, generating $19M annually — 75.1x KALA's $254,000. LENZ is the more profitable business, keeping -4.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to KALA's -141.1%.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $19M | $254,000 |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$91M | -$38M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$82M | -$36M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$70M | -$32M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +97.2% | -3.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -4.8% | -150.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.3% | -141.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -3.7% | -126.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -152.2% | +44.6% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — LENZ and KALA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $278M | $617,676 |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $253M | -$18M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -3.41x | -0.01x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 14.56x | — |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.98x | 0.04x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
LENZ leads this category, winning 7 of 7 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LENZ delivers a -37.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-37 in annual profit, vs $-4 for KALA. LENZ carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KALA's 2.62x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LENZ scores 5/9 vs KALA's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -37.5% | -3.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -35.1% | -143.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -30.7% | — |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -37.2% | -95.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 2.62x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$25M | -$19M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $25M | $51M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $350,000 | $32M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -6.92x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LENZ leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LENZ five years ago would be worth $2,757 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3 for KALA. Over the past 12 months, LENZ leads with a -61.6% total return vs KALA's -97.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LENZ at 16.6% vs KALA's -82.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -39.3% | -86.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -61.6% | -97.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +58.4% | -99.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -72.4% | -100.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -72.4% | -100.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +16.6% | -82.6% |
Risk & Volatility
LENZ leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LENZ is the less volatile stock with a 1.78 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than KALA's 2.09 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LENZ currently trades 19.3% from its 52-week high vs KALA's 0.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.78x | 2.09x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $50.40 | $20.60 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $8.25 | $0.08 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +19.3% | +0.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 49.5 | 30.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 909K | 9.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates LENZ as "Buy" and KALA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 21861.5% upside for KALA (target: $18) vs 431.6% for LENZ (target: $52).
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $51.67 | $18.25 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 9 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.3% | 0.0% |
LENZ leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Profitability & Efficiency. 1 category is tied.
LENZ vs KALA: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LENZ or KALA a better buy right now?
Analysts rate LENZ Therapeutics, Inc.
(LENZ) a "Buy" — based on 5 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which is the better long-term investment — LENZ or KALA?
Over the past 5 years, LENZ Therapeutics, Inc.
(LENZ) delivered a total return of -72. 4%, compared to -100. 0% for KALA BIO, Inc. (KALA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LENZ returned -72. 4% versus KALA's -100. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — LENZ or KALA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), LENZ Therapeutics, Inc.
(LENZ) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 78β versus KALA BIO, Inc. 's 2. 09β — meaning KALA is approximately 18% more volatile than LENZ relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, LENZ Therapeutics, Inc. (LENZ) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 3% for KALA BIO, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — LENZ or KALA?
On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: KALA BIO, Inc.
grew EPS 59. 8% year-over-year, compared to -21. 8% for LENZ Therapeutics, Inc.. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
05Which has better profit margins — LENZ or KALA?
LENZ Therapeutics, Inc.
(LENZ) is the more profitable company, earning -430. 3% net margin versus -141. 1% for KALA BIO, Inc. — meaning it keeps -430. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LENZ leads at -477. 5% versus -150. 6% for KALA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LENZ leads at 97. 8%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
06Which pays a better dividend — LENZ or KALA?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
07Is LENZ or KALA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, LENZ Therapeutics, Inc.
(LENZ) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding. KALA BIO, Inc. (KALA) carries a higher beta of 2. 09 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LENZ: -72. 4%, KALA: -100. 0%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
08What are the main differences between LENZ and KALA?
Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.