Drug Manufacturers - General
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ABBV vs LLY vs JNJ vs NVO vs MRK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
ABBV vs LLY vs JNJ vs NVO vs MRK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $358.42B | $921.16B | $536.23B | $203.48B | $277.34B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $61.16B | $72.25B | $92.15B | $327.80B | $64.93B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $4.23B | $25.27B | $25.12B | $121.96B | $18.25B |
| Gross Margin | 70.2% | 83.5% | 68.1% | 81.8% | 74.2% |
| Operating Margin | 26.7% | 45.9% | 26.1% | 45.3% | 41.1% |
| Forward P/E | 14.3x | 28.2x | 19.2x | 2.1x | 21.9x |
| Total Debt | $69.07B | $42.50B | $36.63B | $130.96B | $50.53B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5.23B | $7.16B | $24.11B | $26.46B | $14.56B |
ABBV vs LLY vs JNJ vs NVO vs MRK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 218.7 | +118.7% |
| Eli Lilly and Compa… (LLY) | 100 | 637.4 | +537.4% |
| Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) | 100 | 149.6 | +49.6% |
| Novo Nordisk A/S (NVO) | 100 | 138.9 | +38.9% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 145.9 | +45.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ABBV vs LLY vs JNJ vs NVO vs MRK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, ABBV doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
LLY is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 44.7%, EPS growth 96.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 31.7%
- 12.4% 10Y total return vs ABBV's 295.5%
- 44.7% revenue growth vs MRK's 1.2%
JNJ ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 36 yrs, beta 0.06, yield 2.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.06, Low D/E 51.2%, current ratio 1.11x
- Beta 0.06, yield 2.2%, current ratio 1.11x
- Beta 0.06 vs NVO's 1.56, lower leverage
NVO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.10 vs JNJ's 34.17
- Lower P/E (2.1x vs 21.9x), PEG 0.10 vs 1.03
- 37.2% margin vs ABBV's 6.9%
- 4.0% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs JNJ's 2.2%
MRK is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +46.1% vs NVO's -29.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 44.7% revenue growth vs MRK's 1.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (2.1x vs 21.9x), PEG 0.10 vs 1.03 | |
| Quality / Margins | 37.2% margin vs ABBV's 6.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.06 vs NVO's 1.56, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 4.0% yield, 8-year raise streak, vs JNJ's 2.2% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +46.1% vs NVO's -29.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 23.3% ROA vs ABBV's 3.1%, ROIC 36.2% vs 23.9% |
ABBV vs LLY vs JNJ vs NVO vs MRK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ABBV vs LLY vs JNJ vs NVO vs MRK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LLY leads in 2 of 6 categories
NVO leads 1 • JNJ leads 1 • ABBV leads 0 • MRK leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LLY leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NVO is the larger business by revenue, generating $327.8B annually — 5.4x ABBV's $61.2B. NVO is the more profitable business, keeping 37.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ABBV's 6.9%. On growth, LLY holds the edge at +55.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $61.2B | $72.2B | $92.1B | $327.8B | $64.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $24.5B | $34.7B | $31.4B | $170.2B | $32.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $4.2B | $25.3B | $25.1B | $122.0B | $18.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $18.7B | $13.6B | $19.1B | $31.0B | $12.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +70.2% | +83.5% | +68.1% | +81.8% | +74.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +26.7% | +45.9% | +26.1% | +45.3% | +41.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.9% | +35.0% | +27.3% | +37.2% | +28.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +30.6% | +18.8% | +20.7% | +9.5% | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +10.0% | +55.5% | +6.8% | +24.0% | +4.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +57.4% | +169.9% | +91.0% | +67.1% | -19.6% |
Valuation Metrics
NVO leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.6x trailing earnings, NVO trades at a 85% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), NVO offers better value at 0.61x vs JNJ's 34.17x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $358.4B | $921.2B | $536.2B | $203.5B | $277.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $422.3B | $956.5B | $548.8B | $219.9B | $313.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 85.50x | 42.48x | 38.43x | 12.64x | 15.42x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 14.28x | 28.24x | 19.20x | 2.15x | 21.93x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.47x | 34.17x | 0.61x | 0.73x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 14.96x | 30.60x | 18.61x | 9.34x | 10.68x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 5.86x | 14.13x | 6.04x | 4.19x | 4.27x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 32.99x | 7.56x | 6.67x | 5.35x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 20.12x | 102.67x | 27.02x | 44.63x | 22.44x |
Profitability & Efficiency
JNJ leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ABBV delivers a 62.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $62 in annual profit, vs $32 for JNJ. JNJ carries lower financial leverage with a 0.51x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LLY's 1.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LLY scores 8/9 vs MRK's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +62.1% | +101.2% | +31.7% | +66.4% | +36.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.1% | +22.7% | +13.0% | +23.3% | +14.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +23.9% | +41.8% | +20.7% | +36.2% | +22.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +21.5% | +46.6% | +17.6% | +44.4% | +23.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 1.60x | 0.51x | 0.67x | 0.96x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $63.8B | $35.3B | $12.5B | $104.5B | $36.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5.2B | $7.2B | $24.1B | $26.5B | $14.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $69.1B | $42.5B | $36.6B | $131.0B | $50.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 3.28x | 35.68x | 48.23x | 18.90x | 19.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LLY leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LLY five years ago would be worth $51,115 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $13,639 for NVO. Over the past 12 months, MRK leads with a +46.1% total return vs NVO's -29.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LLY at 31.8% vs NVO's -16.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -10.1% | -9.6% | +7.9% | -10.2% | +6.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +11.3% | +26.3% | +44.8% | -29.5% | +46.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +50.4% | +129.1% | +46.3% | -40.7% | +2.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +101.3% | +411.1% | +46.1% | +36.4% | +70.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +295.5% | +1237.7% | +132.3% | +99.6% | +166.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +14.6% | +31.8% | +13.5% | -16.0% | +0.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — JNJ and MRK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
JNJ is the less volatile stock with a 0.06 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NVO's 1.56 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MRK currently trades 89.7% from its 52-week high vs NVO's 56.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.34x | 0.71x | 0.06x | 1.56x | 0.48x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $244.81 | $1133.95 | $251.71 | $81.44 | $125.14 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $176.57 | $623.78 | $146.12 | $35.12 | $73.31 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +82.8% | +86.0% | +88.4% | +56.2% | +89.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.8 | 61.4 | 37.1 | 73.4 | 46.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5.8M | 2.6M | 7.0M | 18.4M | 7.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — JNJ and NVO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ABBV as "Buy", LLY as "Buy", JNJ as "Buy", NVO as "Buy", MRK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 29.1% upside for LLY (target: $1258) vs 2.6% for NVO (target: $47). For income investors, NVO offers the higher dividend yield at 4.00% vs LLY's 0.61%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $256.64 | $1258.47 | $249.27 | $47.00 | $129.31 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 41 | 45 | 40 | 39 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +3.2% | +0.6% | +2.2% | +4.0% | +2.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 13 | 11 | 36 | 8 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $6.57 | $6.00 | $4.87 | $11.64 | $3.26 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.3% | +0.4% | +0.5% | +0.1% | +1.8% |
LLY leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). NVO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
ABBV vs LLY vs JNJ vs NVO vs MRK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ABBV or LLY or JNJ or NVO or MRK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Eli Lilly and Company (LLY) is the stronger pick with 44.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 2% for Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK). Novo Nordisk A/S (NVO) offers the better valuation at 12. 6x trailing P/E (2. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) a "Buy" — based on 41 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 has the better valuation — ABBV or LLY or JNJ or NVO or MRK?
On trailing P/E, Novo Nordisk A/S (NVO) is the cheapest at 12.
6x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 5x. On forward P/E, Novo Nordisk A/S is actually cheaper at 2. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Novo Nordisk A/S wins at 0. 10x versus Johnson & Johnson's 34. 17x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ABBV or LLY or JNJ or NVO or MRK?
Over the past 5 years, Eli Lilly and Company (LLY) delivered a total return of +411.
1%, compared to +36. 4% for Novo Nordisk A/S (NVO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LLY returned +1238% versus NVO's +99. 6%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — ABBV or LLY or JNJ or NVO or MRK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
06β versus Novo Nordisk A/S's 1. 56β — meaning NVO is approximately 2635% more volatile than JNJ relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 51% versus 160% for Eli Lilly and Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ABBV or LLY or JNJ or NVO or MRK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Eli Lilly and Company (LLY) is pulling ahead at 44.
7% versus 1. 2% for Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Eli Lilly and Company grew EPS 96. 0% year-over-year, compared to -57. 8% for Johnson & Johnson. Over a 3-year CAGR, LLY leads at 31. 7% annualised revenue growth. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — ABBV or LLY or JNJ or NVO or MRK?
Novo Nordisk A/S (NVO) is the more profitable company, earning 33.
1% net margin versus 6. 9% for AbbVie Inc. — meaning it keeps 33. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LLY leads at 45. 6% versus 24. 9% for JNJ. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LLY leads at 83. 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.
07Is ABBV or LLY or JNJ or NVO or MRK more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Novo Nordisk A/S (NVO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 10x versus Johnson & Johnson's 34. 17x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Novo Nordisk A/S (NVO) trades at 2. 1x forward P/E versus 28. 2x for Eli Lilly and Company — 26. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LLY: 29. 1% to $1258. 47.
08Which pays a better dividend — ABBV or LLY or JNJ or NVO or MRK?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Novo Nordisk A/S (NVO) offers the highest yield at 4. 0%, versus 0. 6% for Eli Lilly and Company (LLY).
09Is ABBV or LLY or JNJ or NVO or MRK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Eli Lilly and Company (LLY) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
71), 0. 6% yield, +1238% 10Y return). Novo Nordisk A/S (NVO) carries a higher beta of 1. 56 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LLY: +1238%, NVO: +99. 6%), 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.
10What are the main differences between ABBV and LLY and JNJ and NVO and MRK?
Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: ABBV is a large-cap income-oriented stock; LLY is a large-cap high-growth stock; JNJ is a large-cap quality compounder stock; NVO is a large-cap deep-value stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock. 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 all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.