Drug Manufacturers - General
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
AMGN vs DBVT vs REGN vs ABBV vs MRK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
AMGN vs DBVT vs REGN vs ABBV vs MRK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - General | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $179.01B | $1690.08T | $74.28B | $356.49B | $275.10B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $37.24B | $0.00 | $14.92B | $61.16B | $64.93B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $7.80B | $-168M | $4.42B | $4.23B | $18.25B |
| Gross Margin | 71.5% | — | 84.5% | 70.2% | 74.2% |
| Operating Margin | 31.6% | — | 24.3% | 26.7% | 41.1% |
| Forward P/E | 14.8x | — | 15.5x | 14.2x | 21.7x |
| Total Debt | $54.60B | $22M | $2.71B | $69.07B | $50.53B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $9.13B | $194M | $3.12B | $5.23B | $14.56B |
AMGN vs DBVT vs REGN vs ABBV vs MRK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Amgen Inc. (AMGN) | 100 | 144.4 | +44.4% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 40.7 | -59.3% |
| Regeneron Pharmaceu… (REGN) | 100 | 116.7 | +16.7% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 217.5 | +117.5% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 144.7 | +44.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AMGN vs DBVT vs REGN vs ABBV vs MRK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AMGN has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 9.9%, EPS growth 88.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.8%
- 9.9% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0%
- 2.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ABBV's 3.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
DBVT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +100.5% vs ABBV's +12.2%
REGN is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.77, Low D/E 8.7%, current ratio 4.13x
- 29.6% margin vs DBVT's 0.3%
ABBV is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.28, yield 3.3%
- 293.8% 10Y total return vs MRK's 164.7%
- Beta 0.28, yield 3.3%, current ratio 0.67x
- Better valuation composite
MRK is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.02 vs AMGN's 5.04
- 14.6% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 9.9% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.6% margin vs DBVT's 0.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.28 vs DBVT's 1.26 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ABBV's 3.3%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +100.5% vs ABBV's +12.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.6% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0% |
AMGN vs DBVT vs REGN vs ABBV vs MRK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
AMGN vs DBVT vs REGN vs ABBV vs MRK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
REGN leads in 2 of 6 categories
MRK leads 1 • AMGN leads 0 • DBVT leads 0 • ABBV leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
REGN leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK and DBVT operate at a comparable scale, with $64.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. REGN is the more profitable business, keeping 29.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ABBV's 6.9%. On growth, REGN holds the edge at +19.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $37.2B | $0 | $14.9B | $61.2B | $64.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $15.6B | -$112M | $4.2B | $24.5B | $32.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $7.8B | -$168M | $4.4B | $4.2B | $18.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $8.6B | -$151M | $4.2B | $18.7B | $12.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +71.5% | — | +84.5% | +70.2% | +74.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +31.6% | — | +24.3% | +26.7% | +41.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +20.9% | — | +29.6% | +6.9% | +28.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +23.1% | — | +27.9% | +30.6% | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +5.8% | — | +19.0% | +10.0% | +4.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.4% | +91.5% | -7.2% | +57.4% | -19.6% |
Valuation Metrics
MRK leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.3x trailing earnings, MRK trades at a 82% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MRK offers better value at 0.72x vs AMGN's 7.93x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $179.0B | $1690.08T | $74.3B | $356.5B | $275.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $224.5B | $1690.08T | $73.9B | $420.3B | $311.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 23.31x | -0.75x | 17.23x | 85.04x | 15.30x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 14.81x | — | 15.46x | 14.17x | 21.69x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 7.93x | — | 2.72x | — | 0.72x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 14.17x | — | 17.92x | 14.89x | 10.61x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.87x | — | 5.18x | 5.83x | 4.24x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 20.76x | 0.65x | 2.48x | — | 5.30x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 22.10x | — | 18.20x | 20.01x | 22.26x |
Profitability & Efficiency
REGN leads this category, winning 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 $-130 for DBVT. REGN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.09x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AMGN's 6.31x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AMGN scores 7/9 vs MRK's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +89.4% | -130.2% | +14.3% | +62.1% | +36.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +8.6% | -89.0% | +11.1% | +3.1% | +14.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +14.8% | — | +8.9% | +23.9% | +22.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +16.0% | -145.7% | +10.2% | +21.5% | +23.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 6.31x | 0.13x | 0.09x | — | 0.96x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $45.5B | -$172M | -$412M | $63.8B | $36.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $9.1B | $194M | $3.1B | $5.2B | $14.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $54.6B | $22M | $2.7B | $69.1B | $50.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.02x | -189.82x | 108.44x | 3.28x | 19.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — AMGN and ABBV each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABBV five years ago would be worth $19,956 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,172 for DBVT. Over the past 12 months, DBVT leads with a +100.5% total return vs ABBV's +12.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AMGN at 15.2% vs REGN's -1.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.0% | +3.6% | -7.8% | -10.6% | +5.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +25.5% | +100.5% | +31.2% | +12.2% | +47.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +53.1% | +18.1% | -4.4% | +49.7% | +2.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +48.2% | -68.3% | +43.2% | +99.6% | +69.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +158.1% | -87.1% | +91.6% | +293.8% | +164.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +15.2% | +5.7% | -1.5% | +14.4% | +0.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ABBV and MRK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABBV is the less volatile stock with a 0.28 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than DBVT's 1.26 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MRK currently trades 89.0% from its 52-week high vs DBVT's 75.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.61x | 1.26x | 0.77x | 0.28x | 0.45x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $391.29 | $26.18 | $821.11 | $244.81 | $125.14 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $261.43 | $7.53 | $476.49 | $176.57 | $73.31 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +84.8% | +75.3% | +87.1% | +82.3% | +89.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.1 | 47.4 | 41.7 | 43.9 | 43.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.5M | 252K | 626K | 5.8M | 7.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — AMGN and ABBV each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AMGN as "Buy", DBVT as "Buy", REGN as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", MRK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 134.8% upside for DBVT (target: $46) vs 6.2% for AMGN (target: $352). For income investors, ABBV offers the higher dividend yield at 3.26% vs REGN's 0.48%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $352.31 | $46.33 | $865.68 | $256.69 | $129.31 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 38 | 15 | 48 | 41 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.9% | — | +0.5% | +3.3% | +2.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 15 | 0 | 1 | 13 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $9.45 | — | $3.41 | $6.57 | $3.26 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +5.3% | +0.3% | +1.8% |
REGN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). MRK leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
AMGN vs DBVT vs REGN vs ABBV vs MRK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AMGN or DBVT or REGN or ABBV or MRK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Amgen Inc.
(AMGN) is the stronger pick with 9. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 0% for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (REGN). Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) offers the better valuation at 15. 3x trailing P/E (21. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Amgen Inc. (AMGN) a "Buy" — based on 38 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 — AMGN or DBVT or REGN or ABBV or MRK?
On trailing P/E, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the cheapest at 15. 3x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 0x. On forward P/E, AbbVie Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Merck & Co. , Inc. wins at 1. 02x versus Amgen Inc. 's 5. 04x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AMGN or DBVT or REGN or ABBV or MRK?
Over the past 5 years, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) delivered a total return of +99. 6%, compared to -68. 3% for DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABBV returned +293. 8% versus DBVT's -87. 1%. 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 — AMGN or DBVT or REGN or ABBV or MRK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 28β versus DBV Technologies S. A. 's 1. 26β — meaning DBVT is approximately 357% more volatile than ABBV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (REGN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 9% versus 6% for Amgen Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — AMGN or DBVT or REGN or ABBV or MRK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Amgen Inc.
(AMGN) is pulling ahead at 9. 9% versus 1. 0% for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (REGN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Amgen Inc. grew EPS 88. 2% year-over-year, compared to -347. 5% for DBV Technologies S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AMGN leads at 11. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — AMGN or DBVT or REGN or ABBV or MRK?
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(REGN) is the more profitable company, earning 31. 4% net margin versus 0. 0% for DBV Technologies S. A. — meaning it keeps 31. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MRK leads at 36. 2% versus 0. 0% for DBVT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — REGN leads at 85. 4%, 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 AMGN or DBVT or REGN or ABBV 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, Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 02x versus Amgen Inc. 's 5. 04x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) trades at 14. 2x forward P/E versus 21. 7x for Merck & Co. , Inc. — 7. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DBVT: 134. 8% to $46. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — AMGN or DBVT or REGN or ABBV or MRK?
In this comparison, ABBV (3.
3% yield), MRK (2. 9% yield), AMGN (2. 9% yield), REGN (0. 5% yield) pay a dividend. DBVT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is AMGN or DBVT or REGN or ABBV or MRK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 28), 3. 3% yield, +293. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABBV: +293. 8%, DBVT: -87. 1%), 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 AMGN and DBVT and REGN and ABBV 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: AMGN is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; DBVT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; REGN is a mid-cap deep-value stock; ABBV is a large-cap income-oriented stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock. AMGN, ABBV, MRK pay a dividend while DBVT, REGN do 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.