Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
AXSM vs INTR vs NU vs INVA vs SOFI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Banks - Regional
Banks - Diversified
Biotechnology
Financial - Credit Services
AXSM vs INTR vs NU vs INVA vs SOFI — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Banks - Regional | Banks - Diversified | Biotechnology | Financial - Credit Services |
| Market Cap | $11.33B | $2.95B | $54.52B | $1.93B | $20.40B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $708M | $14.62B | $11.10B | $424M | $4.77B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-188M | $1.32B | $2.53B | $504M | $481M |
| Gross Margin | 92.6% | 42.4% | 45.9% | 76.2% | 75.1% |
| Operating Margin | -24.8% | 10.9% | 25.2% | 14.8% | 11.0% |
| Forward P/E | — | 1.6x | 16.4x | 11.9x | 26.5x |
| Total Debt | $241M | $29.63B | $887M | $269M | $1.82B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $323M | $11.00B | $13.64B | $551M | $4.93B |
AXSM vs INTR vs NU vs INVA vs SOFI — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 22 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Axsome Therapeutics… (AXSM) | 100 | 574.7 | +474.7% |
| Inter & Co, Inc. (INTR) | 100 | 319.0 | +219.0% |
| Nu Holdings Ltd. (NU) | 100 | 381.3 | +281.3% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 154.5 | +54.5% |
| SoFi Technologies, … (SOFI) | 100 | 303.6 | +203.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AXSM vs INTR vs NU vs INVA vs SOFI
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AXSM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 65.5%, EPS growth 38.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 133.7%
- 18.9% 10Y total return vs INTR's 98.9%
- 65.5% revenue growth vs INVA's 18.5%
- +98.5% vs INTR's +0.9%
INTR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.01 vs INVA's 1.15
- Lower P/E (1.6x vs 26.5x)
- 1.6% yield; 3-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
NU is the clearest fit if your priority is bank quality.
- NIM 13.6% vs SOFI's 4.4%
INVA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.13
- Lower volatility, beta 0.13, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 14.64x
- Beta 0.13, current ratio 14.64x
- 118.9% margin vs AXSM's -26.6%
Among these 5 stocks, SOFI doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 65.5% revenue growth vs INVA's 18.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (1.6x vs 26.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs AXSM's -26.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.13 vs SOFI's 2.54 | |
| Dividends | 1.6% yield; 3-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +98.5% vs INTR's +0.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.4% ROA vs AXSM's -27.8%, ROIC 14.2% vs -19.1% |
AXSM vs INTR vs NU vs INVA vs SOFI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
AXSM vs INTR vs NU vs INVA vs SOFI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INTR leads in 2 of 6 categories
INVA leads 1 • NU leads 1 • AXSM leads 1 • SOFI leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INVA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INTR is the larger business by revenue, generating $14.6B annually — 34.5x INVA's $424M. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to AXSM's -26.6%. On growth, AXSM holds the edge at +57.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $708M | $14.6B | $11.1B | $424M | $4.8B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$167M | $1.9B | $3.6B | $86M | $760M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$188M | $1.3B | $2.5B | $504M | $481M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$71M | $3.9B | $3.7B | $181M | -$2.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +92.6% | +42.4% | +45.9% | +76.2% | +75.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -24.8% | +10.9% | +25.2% | +14.8% | +11.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -26.6% | +8.8% | +17.8% | +118.9% | +10.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -10.0% | +20.5% | +20.0% | +42.8% | -83.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +57.4% | — | — | +10.6% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -3.3% | +39.7% | +45.5% | +4.0% | -56.7% |
Valuation Metrics
INTR leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 83% valuation discount to SOFI's 41.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), INTR offers better value at 0.07x vs INVA's 0.67x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $11.3B | $2.9B | $54.5B | $1.9B | $20.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $11.2B | $6.7B | $41.8B | $1.7B | $17.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -59.81x | 11.44x | 35.65x | 6.91x | 41.03x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 1.60x | 16.43x | 11.91x | 26.45x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.07x | — | 0.67x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 17.25x | 14.54x | 8.10x | 22.75x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 17.74x | 1.00x | 4.91x | 4.55x | 4.28x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 124.01x | 1.41x | 9.12x | 1.65x | 1.91x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 4.87x | 24.51x | 9.88x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
NU leads this category, winning 5 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 $-3 for AXSM. NU carries lower financial leverage with a 0.12x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to INTR's 2.85x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NU scores 7/9 vs SOFI's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.6% | +13.7% | +24.0% | +46.5% | +5.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -27.8% | +1.5% | +3.7% | +32.4% | +1.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -19.1% | +3.9% | +26.0% | +14.2% | +3.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -52.1% | +3.2% | +27.4% | +12.4% | +1.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.73x | 2.85x | 0.12x | 0.23x | 0.17x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$82M | $18.6B | -$12.8B | -$282M | -$3.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $323M | $11.0B | $13.6B | $551M | $4.9B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $241M | $29.6B | $887M | $269M | $1.8B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -34.13x | 0.27x | 0.90x | 63.45x | 0.45x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AXSM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AXSM five years ago would be worth $38,641 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $9,691 for SOFI. Over the past 12 months, AXSM leads with a +98.5% total return vs INTR's +0.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors INTR at 54.4% vs INVA's 25.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +23.2% | -19.4% | -16.2% | +14.7% | -41.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +98.5% | +0.9% | +15.3% | +21.7% | +23.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +183.2% | +268.3% | +140.9% | +95.2% | +192.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +286.4% | +98.9% | +38.0% | +94.4% | -3.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +1886.5% | +98.9% | +38.0% | +94.9% | +52.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +41.5% | +54.4% | +34.0% | +25.0% | +43.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — AXSM and INVA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INVA is the less volatile stock with a 0.13 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SOFI's 2.54 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AXSM currently trades 94.2% from its 52-week high vs SOFI's 48.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.69x | 1.39x | 1.37x | 0.13x | 2.54x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $233.75 | $10.36 | $18.98 | $25.15 | $32.73 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $96.09 | $6.40 | $11.71 | $16.52 | $12.56 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.2% | +64.7% | +75.1% | +90.7% | +48.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 78.8 | 47.9 | 47.6 | 39.9 | 41.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 667K | 3.2M | 48.4M | 621K | 65.8M |
Analyst Outlook
INTR leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AXSM as "Buy", INTR as "Buy", NU as "Buy", INVA as "Buy", SOFI as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 79.1% upside for INTR (target: $12) vs 2.6% for AXSM (target: $226). INTR is the only dividend payer here at 1.64% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $225.86 | $12.00 | $20.48 | $37.67 | $20.89 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 25 | 6 | 22 | 10 | 27 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.6% | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 3 | — | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.54 | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.2% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +0.3% |
INTR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). INVA leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
AXSM vs INTR vs NU vs INVA vs SOFI: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AXSM or INTR or NU or INVA or SOFI a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
(AXSM) is the stronger pick with 65. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 18. 5% for Innoviva, Inc. (INVA). 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 Axsome Therapeutics, Inc. (AXSM) a "Buy" — based on 25 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 — AXSM or INTR or NU or INVA or SOFI?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus SoFi Technologies, Inc. at 41. 0x. On forward P/E, Inter & Co, Inc. is actually cheaper at 1. 6x — 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: Inter & Co, Inc. wins at 0. 01x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 1. 15x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AXSM or INTR or NU or INVA or SOFI?
Over the past 5 years, Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
(AXSM) delivered a total return of +286. 4%, compared to -3. 1% for SoFi Technologies, Inc. (SOFI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AXSM returned +1886% versus NU's +38. 0%. 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 — AXSM or INTR or NU or INVA or SOFI?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 13β versus SoFi Technologies, Inc. 's 2. 54β — meaning SOFI is approximately 1916% more volatile than INVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Nu Holdings Ltd. (NU) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 12% versus 3% for Inter & Co, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — AXSM or INTR or NU or INVA or SOFI?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
(AXSM) is pulling ahead at 65. 5% versus 18. 5% for Innoviva, Inc. (INVA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to 0. 0% for SoFi Technologies, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AXSM leads at 133. 7% 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 — AXSM or INTR or NU or INVA or SOFI?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -28. 7% for Axsome Therapeutics, 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 -26. 5% for AXSM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AXSM leads at 92. 6%, 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 AXSM or INTR or NU or INVA or SOFI 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, Inter & Co, Inc. (INTR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 01x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 1. 15x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Inter & Co, Inc. (INTR) trades at 1. 6x forward P/E versus 26. 5x for SoFi Technologies, Inc. — 24. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for INTR: 79. 1% to $12. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — AXSM or INTR or NU or INVA or SOFI?
In this comparison, INTR (1.
6% yield) pays a dividend. AXSM, NU, INVA, SOFI do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is AXSM or INTR or NU or INVA or SOFI better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
(AXSM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 69), +1886% 10Y return). SoFi Technologies, Inc. (SOFI) carries a higher beta of 2. 54 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (AXSM: +1886%, SOFI: +52. 7%), 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 AXSM and INTR and NU and INVA and SOFI?
These companies operate in different sectors (AXSM (Healthcare) and INTR (Financial Services) and NU (Financial Services) and INVA (Healthcare) and SOFI (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
INTR pays a dividend while AXSM, NU, INVA, SOFI 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.