Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
ATMC vs BFLY vs SONO vs INVA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Devices
Consumer Electronics
Biotechnology
ATMC vs BFLY vs SONO vs INVA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Medical - Devices | Consumer Electronics | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $107M | $1.11B | $1.80B | $1.93B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $103M | $1.46B | $424M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $423K | $-76M | $-41M | $504M |
| Gross Margin | — | 49.2% | 44.8% | 76.2% |
| Operating Margin | — | -79.5% | 2.0% | 14.8% |
| Forward P/E | 57.8x | — | 47.3x | 11.9x |
| Total Debt | $1M | $20M | $60M | $269M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1K | $150M | $175M | $551M |
ATMC vs BFLY vs SONO vs INVA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 23 | Apr 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| AlphaTime Acquisiti… (ATMC) | 100 | 154.2 | +54.2% |
| Butterfly Network, … (BFLY) | 100 | 138.2 | +38.2% |
| Sonos, Inc. (SONO) | 100 | 95.2 | -4.8% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 158.0 | +58.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ATMC vs BFLY vs SONO vs INVA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ATMC is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 0.07
- Lower volatility, beta 0.07, Low D/E 13.3%, current ratio 0.01x
- Beta 0.07 vs BFLY's 3.28
BFLY is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 19.0%, EPS growth 8.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 10.0%
- 19.0% revenue growth vs ATMC's -64.5%
- +94.5% vs INVA's +21.7%
SONO lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
INVA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and defensive.
- 94.9% 10Y total return vs ATMC's 54.8%
- Beta 0.13, current ratio 14.64x
- Lower P/E (11.9x vs 47.3x)
- 118.9% margin vs BFLY's -73.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.0% revenue growth vs ATMC's -64.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (11.9x vs 47.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs BFLY's -73.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.07 vs BFLY's 3.28 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +94.5% vs INVA's +21.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.4% ROA vs BFLY's -25.6%, ROIC 14.2% vs -76.8% |
ATMC vs BFLY vs SONO vs INVA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
ATMC vs BFLY vs SONO vs INVA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INVA leads in 3 of 6 categories
ATMC leads 1 • BFLY leads 0 • SONO leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INVA leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SONO and ATMC operate at a comparable scale, with $1.5B and $0 in trailing revenue. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BFLY's -73.6%. On growth, BFLY holds the edge at +25.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $103M | $1.5B | $424M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $3M | -$76M | $61M | $86M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $422,956 | -$76M | -$41M | $504M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $154,747 | -$19M | $118M | $181M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +49.2% | +44.8% | +76.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -79.5% | +2.0% | +14.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -73.6% | -2.8% | +118.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -18.3% | +8.1% | +42.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +25.0% | +8.4% | +10.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -117.0% | +16.0% | -29.3% | +4.0% |
Valuation Metrics
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 88% valuation discount to ATMC's 57.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, INVA's 8.1x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than SONO's 142.1x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $107M | $1.1B | $1.8B | $1.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $109M | $979M | $1.7B | $1.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 57.78x | -13.68x | -29.20x | 6.91x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 47.27x | 11.91x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.67x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 59.43x | — | 142.14x | 8.10x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 11.37x | 1.25x | 4.55x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 11.29x | 5.35x | 5.06x | 1.65x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 16.64x | 9.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA delivers a 46.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $46 in annual profit, vs $-37 for BFLY. BFLY carries lower financial leverage with a 0.10x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to INVA's 0.23x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), INVA scores 5/9 vs BFLY's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +3.8% | -36.8% | -10.4% | +46.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.6% | -25.6% | -4.8% | +32.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.9% | -76.8% | -13.4% | +14.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -3.7% | -39.3% | -9.9% | +12.4% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.13x | 0.10x | 0.17x | 0.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $1M | -$130M | -$115M | -$282M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1,425 | $150M | $175M | $551M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1M | $20M | $60M | $269M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -71.59x | 2587.88x | 63.45x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — BFLY and INVA each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in INVA five years ago would be worth $19,437 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,490 for BFLY. Over the past 12 months, BFLY leads with a +94.5% total return vs INVA's +21.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors BFLY at 26.2% vs SONO's -11.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | 0.0% | +13.1% | -14.9% | +14.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +33.3% | +94.5% | +66.0% | +21.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +50.3% | +100.9% | -31.6% | +95.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +54.8% | -65.1% | -60.4% | +94.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +54.8% | -57.2% | -25.2% | +94.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +14.5% | +26.2% | -11.9% | +25.0% |
Risk & Volatility
ATMC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ATMC is the less volatile stock with a 0.07 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BFLY's 3.28 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ATMC currently trades 99.0% from its 52-week high vs BFLY's 74.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.07x | 3.28x | 1.75x | 0.13x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $15.76 | $5.72 | $19.82 | $25.15 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $11.58 | $1.32 | $8.73 | $16.52 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +99.0% | +74.1% | +75.1% | +90.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 80.4 | 46.2 | 56.1 | 39.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 134K | 6.4M | 1.3M | 621K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BFLY as "Buy", SONO as "Buy", INVA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 65.2% upside for INVA (target: $38) vs 27.8% for BFLY (target: $5).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $5.42 | $19.50 | $37.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 7 | 9 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +57.9% | 0.0% | +4.5% | +0.2% |
INVA leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). ATMC leads in 1 (Risk & Volatility). 1 tied.
ATMC vs BFLY vs SONO vs INVA: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ATMC or BFLY or SONO or INVA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Butterfly Network, Inc.
(BFLY) is the stronger pick with 19. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 9% for Sonos, Inc. (SONO). Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) offers the better valuation at 6. 9x trailing P/E (11. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Butterfly Network, Inc. (BFLY) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — ATMC or BFLY or SONO or INVA?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus AlphaTime Acquisition Corp at 57. 8x. On forward P/E, Innoviva, Inc. is actually cheaper at 11. 9x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ATMC or BFLY or SONO or INVA?
Over the past 5 years, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) delivered a total return of +94. 4%, compared to -65. 1% for Butterfly Network, Inc. (BFLY). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: INVA returned +94. 9% versus BFLY's -57. 2%. 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 — ATMC or BFLY or SONO or INVA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AlphaTime Acquisition Corp (ATMC) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
07β versus Butterfly Network, Inc. 's 3. 28β — meaning BFLY is approximately 4718% more volatile than ATMC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Butterfly Network, Inc. (BFLY) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 10% versus 23% for Innoviva, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ATMC or BFLY or SONO or INVA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Butterfly Network, Inc.
(BFLY) is pulling ahead at 19. 0% versus -4. 9% for Sonos, Inc. (SONO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to -64. 5% for Sonos, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, BFLY leads at 10. 0% 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 — ATMC or BFLY or SONO or INVA?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -79. 0% for Butterfly Network, Inc. — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INVA leads at 38. 5% versus -88. 5% for BFLY. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — INVA leads at 72. 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 ATMC or BFLY or SONO or INVA more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) trades at 11. 9x forward P/E versus 47. 3x for Sonos, Inc. — 35. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for INVA: 65. 2% to $37. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — ATMC or BFLY or SONO or INVA?
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.
09Is ATMC or BFLY or SONO or INVA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, AlphaTime Acquisition Corp (ATMC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
07)). Butterfly Network, Inc. (BFLY) carries a higher beta of 3. 28 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ATMC: +54. 8%, BFLY: -57. 2%), 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 ATMC and BFLY and SONO and INVA?
These companies operate in different sectors (ATMC (Financial Services) and BFLY (Healthcare) and SONO (Technology) and INVA (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ATMC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BFLY is a small-cap high-growth stock; SONO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth 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.