Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
AUTL vs KYMR vs FATE vs CRSP vs BEAM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
AUTL vs KYMR vs FATE vs CRSP vs BEAM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $410M | $6.91B | $280M | $5.06B | $3.23B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $51M | $51M | $7M | $4M | $132M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-225M | $-315M | $-136M | $-569M | $-65M |
| Gross Margin | -309.4% | 33.2% | — | -41.7% | -64.2% |
| Operating Margin | -8.6% | -7.0% | -22.2% | -134.1% | -281.0% |
| Total Debt | $53M | $82M | $78M | $395M | $294M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $227M | $357M | $47M | $355M | $295M |
AUTL vs KYMR vs FATE vs CRSP vs BEAM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Autolus Therapeutic… (AUTL) | 100 | 10.9 | -89.1% |
| Kymera Therapeutics… (KYMR) | 100 | 265.3 | +165.3% |
| Fate Therapeutics, … (FATE) | 100 | 6.7 | -93.3% |
| CRISPR Therapeutics… (CRSP) | 100 | 56.1 | -43.9% |
| Beam Therapeutics I… (BEAM) | 100 | 125.3 | +25.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AUTL vs KYMR vs FATE vs CRSP vs BEAM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AUTL ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 496.0%, EPS growth 27.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 88.7%
- 496.0% revenue growth vs CRSP's -90.0%
KYMR carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 1.15
- Lower volatility, beta 1.15, Low D/E 5.2%, current ratio 10.47x
- Beta 1.15 vs FATE's 2.17, lower leverage
- +190.7% vs AUTL's +30.5%
FATE lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
CRSP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and defensive.
- 272.0% 10Y total return vs KYMR's 154.4%
- Beta 1.93, current ratio 13.32x
BEAM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- -49.2% margin vs CRSP's -138.6%
- -4.6% ROA vs FATE's -42.7%, ROIC -31.1% vs -36.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 496.0% revenue growth vs CRSP's -90.0% | |
| Quality / Margins | -49.2% margin vs CRSP's -138.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.15 vs FATE's 2.17, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +190.7% vs AUTL's +30.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -4.6% ROA vs FATE's -42.7%, ROIC -31.1% vs -36.5% |
AUTL vs KYMR vs FATE vs CRSP vs BEAM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
AUTL vs KYMR vs FATE vs CRSP vs BEAM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BEAM leads in 3 of 6 categories
KYMR leads 1 • AUTL leads 0 • FATE leads 0 • CRSP leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BEAM leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
BEAM is the larger business by revenue, generating $132M annually — 32.2x CRSP's $4M. BEAM is the more profitable business, keeping -49.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRSP's -138.6%. On growth, CRSP holds the edge at +68.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $51M | $51M | $7M | $4M | $132M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$427M | -$352M | -$148M | -$535M | -$355M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$225M | -$315M | -$136M | -$569M | -$65M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$278M | -$244M | -$88M | -$401M | -$384M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -3.1% | +33.2% | — | -41.7% | -64.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -8.6% | -7.0% | -22.2% | -134.1% | -2.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.4% | -6.1% | -20.5% | -138.6% | -49.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.4% | -4.7% | -13.2% | -97.8% | -2.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +55.5% | -26.4% | +68.6% | -100.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +3.2% | +13.4% | +38.6% | +19.0% | +26.6% |
Valuation Metrics
BEAM leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $410M | $6.9B | $280M | $5.1B | $3.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $235M | $6.6B | $312M | $5.1B | $3.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.84x | -22.93x | -2.11x | -8.10x | -38.85x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 40.47x | 176.26x | 42.18x | 1440.41x | 23.14x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.96x | 4.52x | 1.39x | 2.45x | 2.51x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
BEAM leads this category, winning 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BEAM delivers a -5.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-6 in annual profit, vs $-85 for AUTL. KYMR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FATE's 0.38x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AUTL scores 5/9 vs CRSP's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -84.7% | -25.0% | -65.8% | -30.9% | -5.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -34.0% | -22.3% | -42.7% | -24.5% | -4.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.0% | -24.9% | -36.5% | -22.3% | -31.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -45.9% | -27.2% | -43.1% | -26.6% | -33.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.12x | 0.05x | 0.38x | 0.21x | 0.24x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$175M | -$275M | $31M | $40M | -$1M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $227M | $357M | $47M | $355M | $295M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $53M | $82M | $78M | $395M | $294M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -25.98x | -2119.53x | — | — | 1.08x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
KYMR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KYMR five years ago would be worth $19,212 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $318 for FATE. Over the past 12 months, KYMR leads with a +190.7% total return vs AUTL's +30.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors KYMR at 45.0% vs FATE's -23.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -14.2% | +16.3% | +145.5% | -2.5% | +16.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +30.5% | +190.7% | +143.0% | +53.1% | +93.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -14.6% | +205.1% | -55.4% | -6.3% | -5.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -70.1% | +92.1% | -96.8% | -51.3% | -55.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.6% | +154.4% | +40.5% | +272.0% | +67.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -5.1% | +45.0% | -23.6% | -2.2% | -1.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — KYMR and FATE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KYMR is the less volatile stock with a 1.15 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FATE's 2.17 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FATE currently trades 98.6% from its 52-week high vs AUTL's 59.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.95x | 1.15x | 2.17x | 1.93x | 2.14x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.70 | $103.00 | $2.46 | $78.48 | $36.44 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.15 | $28.06 | $0.91 | $33.50 | $15.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +59.4% | +82.2% | +98.6% | +66.8% | +86.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 64.3 | 54.1 | 81.0 | 55.5 | 60.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.6M | 602K | 1.9M | 2.0M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AUTL as "Buy", KYMR as "Buy", FATE as "Buy", CRSP as "Buy", BEAM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 1525.5% upside for FATE (target: $40) vs 20.2% for CRSP (target: $63).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $8.87 | $117.06 | $39.50 | $63.00 | $40.83 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 26 | 31 | 38 | 27 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
BEAM leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). KYMR leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
AUTL vs KYMR vs FATE vs CRSP vs BEAM: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AUTL or KYMR or FATE or CRSP or BEAM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Autolus Therapeutics plc (AUTL) is the stronger pick with 496.
0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -90. 0% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP). Analysts rate Autolus Therapeutics plc (AUTL) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — AUTL or KYMR or FATE or CRSP or BEAM?
Over the past 5 years, Kymera Therapeutics, Inc.
(KYMR) delivered a total return of +92. 1%, compared to -96. 8% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CRSP returned +272. 0% versus AUTL's -93. 6%. 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 — AUTL or KYMR or FATE or CRSP or BEAM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Kymera Therapeutics, Inc.
(KYMR) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 15β versus Fate Therapeutics, Inc. 's 2. 17β — meaning FATE is approximately 89% 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 38% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — AUTL or KYMR or FATE or CRSP or BEAM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Autolus Therapeutics plc (AUTL) is pulling ahead at 496.
0% versus -90. 0% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Beam Therapeutics Inc. grew EPS 82. 3% year-over-year, compared to -49. 1% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG. Over a 3-year CAGR, CRSP leads at 100. 4% 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 — AUTL or KYMR or FATE or CRSP or BEAM?
Beam Therapeutics Inc.
(BEAM) is the more profitable company, earning -57. 2% net margin versus -165. 7% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG — meaning it keeps -57. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BEAM leads at -274. 6% versus -161. 9% for CRSP. 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 — AUTL or KYMR or FATE or CRSP or BEAM?
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 AUTL or KYMR or FATE or CRSP or BEAM 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 1. 15), +154. 4% 10Y return). Autolus Therapeutics plc (AUTL) carries a higher beta of 1. 95 — 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: +154. 4%, AUTL: -93. 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.
08What are the main differences between AUTL and KYMR and FATE and CRSP and BEAM?
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: AUTL is a small-cap high-growth stock; KYMR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FATE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CRSP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BEAM 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.