Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
ACET vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC vs KYMR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
ACET vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC vs KYMR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $75M | $1.46B | $240M | $4.32B | $7.04B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $286M | $6M | $0.00 | $51M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-109M | $-354M | $-130M | $-193M | $-315M |
| Gross Margin | — | 114.5% | 53.8% | — | 33.2% |
| Operating Margin | — | -127.2% | -22.1% | — | -7.0% |
| Total Debt | $15M | $48M | $78M | $195M | $82M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $39M | $163M | $47M | $166M | $357M |
ACET vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC vs KYMR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adicet Bio, Inc. (ACET) | 100 | 50.4 | -49.6% |
| Iovance Biotherapeu… (IOVA) | 100 | 12.2 | -87.8% |
| Fate Therapeutics, … (FATE) | 100 | 5.7 | -94.3% |
| Celcuity Inc. (CELC) | 100 | 1595.5 | +1495.5% |
| Kymera Therapeutics… (KYMR) | 100 | 270.2 | +170.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ACET vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC vs KYMR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ACET carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for quality and momentum.
- 3.0% margin vs FATE's -20.6%
- +9.3% vs FATE's +47.1%
IOVA ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 1.80
- Rev growth 60.6%, EPS growth 14.8%
- 60.6% revenue growth vs CELC's -51.7%
FATE lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
CELC is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 5.2% 10Y total return vs KYMR's 159.2%
KYMR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.91, Low D/E 5.2%, current ratio 10.47x
- Beta 0.91, current ratio 10.47x
- Beta 0.91 vs ACET's 2.08, lower leverage
- -22.3% ROA vs ACET's -65.4%, ROIC -24.9% vs -64.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 60.6% revenue growth vs CELC's -51.7% | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.0% margin vs FATE's -20.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.91 vs ACET's 2.08, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +9.3% vs FATE's +47.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -22.3% ROA vs ACET's -65.4%, ROIC -24.9% vs -64.9% |
ACET vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC vs KYMR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
ACET vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC vs KYMR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IOVA leads in 2 of 6 categories
KYMR leads 1 • CELC leads 1 • ACET leads 0 • FATE leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IOVA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IOVA and CELC operate at a comparable scale, with $286M and $0 in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from -123.9% (IOVA) to -20.6% (FATE). On growth, KYMR holds the edge at +55.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $286M | $6M | $0 | $51M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$108M | -$330M | -$127M | -$186M | -$352M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$109M | -$354M | -$130M | -$193M | -$315M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$92M | -$305M | -$108M | -$173M | -$244M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +114.5% | +53.8% | — | +33.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -127.2% | -22.1% | — | -7.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -123.9% | -20.6% | — | -6.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -106.8% | -17.1% | — | -4.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +44.8% | -20.3% | — | +55.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +62.1% | +47.2% | +18.8% | -12.8% | +13.4% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — ACET and IOVA and CELC each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $75M | $1.5B | $240M | $4.3B | $7.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $51M | $1.3B | $271M | $4.3B | $6.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.47x | -3.74x | -1.79x | -23.43x | -23.36x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 5.54x | 36.13x | — | 179.54x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.35x | 2.09x | 1.18x | 46.27x | 4.61x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
KYMR leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KYMR delivers a -25.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-25 in annual profit, vs $-2 for CELC. KYMR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CELC's 1.94x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IOVA scores 5/9 vs FATE's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -80.4% | -50.2% | -58.9% | -2.4% | -25.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -65.4% | -38.8% | -39.4% | -50.2% | -22.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -64.9% | -48.9% | -36.5% | -80.4% | -24.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -65.7% | -51.6% | -43.1% | -54.2% | -27.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.09x | 0.07x | 0.38x | 1.94x | 0.05x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$24M | -$115M | $31M | $30M | -$275M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $39M | $163M | $47M | $166M | $357M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $15M | $48M | $78M | $195M | $82M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -1866.49x | — | — | -5.27x | -2119.53x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CELC leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CELC five years ago would be worth $33,516 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $229 for FATE. Over the past 12 months, ACET leads with a +932.2% total return vs FATE's +47.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CELC at 99.6% vs FATE's -27.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -8.7% | +61.9% | +108.1% | -11.9% | +18.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +932.2% | +76.6% | +47.1% | +605.0% | +82.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +62.6% | -51.9% | -61.9% | +694.9% | +242.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -31.6% | -82.9% | -97.7% | +235.2% | +70.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -92.8% | -44.6% | +15.7% | +519.7% | +159.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +17.6% | -21.7% | -27.5% | +99.6% | +50.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ACET and KYMR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KYMR is the less volatile stock with a 0.91 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ACET's 2.08 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ACET currently trades 85.0% from its 52-week high vs CELC's 58.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.08x | 1.80x | 1.93x | 1.56x | 0.91x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.47 | $5.63 | $2.88 | $151.02 | $103.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.46 | $1.66 | $0.91 | $11.28 | $36.65 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.0% | +72.5% | +71.5% | +58.6% | +83.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 45.7 | 51.6 | 47.8 | 32.6 | 56.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 117K | 14.4M | 3.2M | 1.2M | 492K |
Analyst Outlook
IOVA leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ACET as "Buy", IOVA as "Buy", FATE as "Buy", CELC as "Buy", KYMR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 167.0% upside for FATE (target: $6) vs -2.0% for IOVA (target: $4).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $18.00 | $4.00 | $5.50 | $153.22 | $112.60 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 20 | 31 | 12 | 26 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 1 | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
IOVA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). KYMR leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
ACET vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC vs KYMR: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ACET or IOVA or FATE or CELC or KYMR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(IOVA) is the stronger pick with 60. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -51. 2% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Analysts rate Adicet Bio, Inc. (ACET) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — ACET or IOVA or FATE or CELC or KYMR?
Over the past 5 years, Celcuity Inc.
(CELC) delivered a total return of +235. 2%, compared to -97. 7% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CELC returned +519. 7% versus ACET's -92. 8%. 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 — ACET or IOVA or FATE or CELC or KYMR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Kymera Therapeutics, Inc.
(KYMR) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 91β versus Adicet Bio, Inc. 's 2. 08β — meaning ACET is approximately 128% more volatile than KYMR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Kymera Therapeutics, Inc. (KYMR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 194% for Celcuity Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — ACET or IOVA or FATE or CELC or KYMR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(IOVA) is pulling ahead at 60. 6% versus -51. 2% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fate Therapeutics, Inc. grew EPS 29. 9% year-over-year, compared to -33. 6% for Celcuity Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, KYMR leads at -5. 8% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — ACET or IOVA or FATE or CELC or KYMR?
Adicet Bio, Inc.
(ACET) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -20. 5% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ACET leads at 0. 0% versus -22. 2% for FATE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KYMR leads at 100. 0%, 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 — ACET or IOVA or FATE or CELC or KYMR?
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 ACET or IOVA or FATE or CELC or KYMR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Kymera Therapeutics, Inc.
(KYMR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 91), +159. 2% 10Y return). Adicet Bio, Inc. (ACET) carries a higher beta of 2. 08 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (KYMR: +159. 2%, ACET: -92. 8%), 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 ACET and IOVA and FATE and CELC and KYMR?
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: ACET is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IOVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; FATE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CELC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; KYMR is a small-cap quality compounder 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.