Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
ALMS vs ABBV vs JNJ vs PFE vs BMY
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
ALMS vs ABBV vs JNJ vs PFE vs BMY — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $2.79B | $358.42B | $536.23B | $150.63B | $114.85B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $22M | $61.16B | $92.15B | $63.31B | $48.48B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-245M | $4.23B | $25.12B | $7.49B | $7.28B |
| Gross Margin | 96.3% | 70.2% | 68.1% | 69.3% | 68.7% |
| Operating Margin | -20.6% | 26.7% | 26.1% | 23.4% | 25.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | 14.3x | 19.2x | 8.9x | 8.9x |
| Total Debt | $37M | $69.07B | $36.63B | $67.42B | $47.14B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $90M | $5.23B | $24.11B | $1.14B | $10.21B |
ALMS vs ABBV vs JNJ vs PFE vs BMY — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alumis Inc. Common … (ALMS) | 100 | 178.6 | +78.6% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 118.1 | +18.1% |
| Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) | 100 | 152.2 | +52.2% |
| Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | 100 | 94.6 | -5.4% |
| Bristol-Myers Squib… (BMY) | 100 | 135.4 | +35.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ALMS vs ABBV vs JNJ vs PFE vs BMY
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ALMS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +396.0% vs ABBV's +11.3%
ABBV ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 8.6%, EPS growth -0.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 1.8%
- 295.5% 10Y total return vs JNJ's 132.3%
- 8.6% revenue growth vs ALMS's -2.5%
JNJ carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.06, Low D/E 51.2%, current ratio 1.11x
- 27.3% margin vs ALMS's -11.1%
- Beta 0.06 vs ALMS's 1.77
- 13.0% ROA vs ALMS's -57.6%, ROIC 20.7% vs -184.1%
PFE is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.54, yield 6.5%
- 6.5% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs JNJ's 2.2%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
BMY is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 0.50, yield 4.4%, current ratio 1.26x
- Lower P/E (8.9x vs 8.9x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.6% revenue growth vs ALMS's -2.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.9x vs 8.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.3% margin vs ALMS's -11.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.06 vs ALMS's 1.77 | |
| Dividends | 6.5% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs JNJ's 2.2%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +396.0% vs ABBV's +11.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.0% ROA vs ALMS's -57.6%, ROIC 20.7% vs -184.1% |
ALMS vs ABBV vs JNJ vs PFE vs BMY — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
ALMS vs ABBV vs JNJ vs PFE vs BMY — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ABBV leads in 1 of 6 categories
BMY leads 1 • ALMS leads 1 • JNJ leads 0 • PFE leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABBV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JNJ is the larger business by revenue, generating $92.1B annually — 4165.7x ALMS's $22M. JNJ is the more profitable business, keeping 27.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ALMS's -11.1%. On growth, ABBV holds the edge at +10.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $22M | $61.2B | $92.1B | $63.3B | $48.5B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$453M | $24.5B | $31.4B | $21.0B | $15.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$245M | $4.2B | $25.1B | $7.5B | $7.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$373M | $18.7B | $19.1B | $9.5B | $11.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +96.3% | +70.2% | +68.1% | +69.3% | +68.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -20.6% | +26.7% | +26.1% | +23.4% | +25.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -11.1% | +6.9% | +27.3% | +11.8% | +15.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -16.9% | +30.6% | +20.7% | +15.0% | +24.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +10.0% | +6.8% | +5.4% | +2.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +38.7% | +57.4% | +91.0% | -9.5% | +9.2% |
Valuation Metrics
BMY leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.3x trailing earnings, BMY trades at a 81% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.5x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, BMY's 9.2x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than JNJ's 18.6x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2.8B | $358.4B | $536.2B | $150.6B | $114.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.7B | $422.3B | $548.8B | $216.9B | $151.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -8.31x | 85.50x | 38.43x | 19.47x | 16.30x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 14.28x | 19.20x | 8.94x | 8.93x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 34.17x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 14.96x | 18.61x | 10.66x | 9.17x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 116.09x | 5.86x | 6.04x | 2.41x | 2.38x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 67.05x | — | 7.56x | 1.74x | 6.20x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 20.12x | 27.02x | 16.60x | 8.94x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — ALMS and ABBV each lead in 3 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 $-76 for ALMS. ALMS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.12x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BMY's 2.55x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BMY scores 8/9 vs ALMS's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -75.5% | +62.1% | +31.7% | +8.3% | +39.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -57.6% | +3.1% | +13.0% | +3.6% | +7.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -184.1% | +23.9% | +20.7% | +7.5% | +16.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -144.4% | +21.5% | +17.6% | +9.0% | +18.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.12x | — | 0.51x | 0.78x | 2.55x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$53M | $63.8B | $12.5B | $66.3B | $36.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $90M | $5.2B | $24.1B | $1.1B | $10.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $37M | $69.1B | $36.6B | $67.4B | $47.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 3.28x | 48.23x | 4.02x | 10.33x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ALMS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABBV five years ago would be worth $20,131 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,674 for PFE. Over the past 12 months, ALMS leads with a +396.0% total return vs ABBV's +11.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ALMS at 21.3% vs PFE's -6.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +165.3% | -10.1% | +7.9% | +6.9% | +7.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +396.0% | +11.3% | +44.8% | +23.7% | +23.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +78.6% | +50.4% | +46.3% | -18.4% | -7.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +78.6% | +101.3% | +46.1% | -13.3% | +5.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +78.6% | +295.5% | +132.3% | +29.6% | +6.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +21.3% | +14.6% | +13.5% | -6.6% | -2.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — JNJ and PFE 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 ALMS's 1.77 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PFE currently trades 92.1% from its 52-week high vs ALMS's 77.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.77x | 0.34x | 0.06x | 0.54x | 0.50x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $30.60 | $244.81 | $251.71 | $28.75 | $62.89 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.76 | $176.57 | $146.12 | $21.97 | $42.52 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +77.6% | +82.8% | +88.4% | +92.1% | +89.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.3 | 46.8 | 37.1 | 44.2 | 41.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.4M | 5.8M | 7.0M | 33.3M | 10.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — JNJ and PFE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ALMS as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", JNJ as "Buy", PFE as "Hold", BMY as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 61.8% upside for ALMS (target: $38) vs 3.0% for PFE (target: $27). For income investors, PFE offers the higher dividend yield at 6.49% vs JNJ's 2.19%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $38.44 | $256.64 | $249.27 | $27.27 | $62.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 41 | 40 | 39 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.2% | +2.2% | +6.5% | +4.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 13 | 36 | 15 | 6 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $6.57 | $4.87 | $1.72 | $2.47 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.3% | +0.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
ABBV leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). BMY leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
ALMS vs ABBV vs JNJ vs PFE vs BMY: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ALMS or ABBV or JNJ or PFE or BMY a better buy right now?
For growth investors, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the stronger pick with 8. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMY) offers the better valuation at 16. 3x trailing P/E (8. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Alumis Inc. Common Stock (ALMS) a "Buy" — based on 8 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 — ALMS or ABBV or JNJ or PFE or BMY?
On trailing P/E, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMY) is the cheapest at 16.
3x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 5x. On forward P/E, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company is actually cheaper at 8. 9x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ALMS or ABBV or JNJ or PFE or BMY?
Over the past 5 years, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) delivered a total return of +101. 3%, compared to -13. 3% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABBV returned +295. 5% versus BMY's +6. 7%. 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 — ALMS or ABBV or JNJ or PFE or BMY?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
06β versus Alumis Inc. Common Stock's 1. 77β — meaning ALMS is approximately 3003% more volatile than JNJ relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Alumis Inc. Common Stock (ALMS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 12% versus 3% for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ALMS or ABBV or JNJ or PFE or BMY?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is pulling ahead at 8. 6% versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company grew EPS 178. 2% year-over-year, compared to -57. 8% for Johnson & Johnson. Over a 3-year CAGR, JNJ leads at 4. 1% 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 — ALMS or ABBV or JNJ or PFE or BMY?
Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) is the more profitable company, earning 15.
8% net margin versus -1011. 7% for Alumis Inc. Common Stock — meaning it keeps 15. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ABBV leads at 32. 8% versus -1886. 9% for ALMS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ALMS leads at 96. 3%, 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 ALMS or ABBV or JNJ or PFE or BMY more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMY) trades at 8.
9x forward P/E versus 19. 2x for Johnson & Johnson — 10. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ALMS: 61. 8% to $38. 44.
08Which pays a better dividend — ALMS or ABBV or JNJ or PFE or BMY?
In this comparison, PFE (6.
5% yield), BMY (4. 4% yield), ABBV (3. 2% yield), JNJ (2. 2% yield) pay a dividend. ALMS does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ALMS or ABBV or JNJ or PFE or BMY better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
06), 2. 2% yield, +132. 3% 10Y return). Alumis Inc. Common Stock (ALMS) carries a higher beta of 1. 77 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (JNJ: +132. 3%, ALMS: +78. 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 ALMS and ABBV and JNJ and PFE and BMY?
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: ALMS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ABBV is a large-cap income-oriented stock; JNJ is a large-cap quality compounder stock; PFE is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; BMY is a mid-cap deep-value stock. ABBV, JNJ, PFE, BMY pay a dividend while ALMS does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.