Comprehensive Stock Comparison
Compare Azitra, Inc. (AZTR) vs PMGC Holdings Inc. (ELAB) Stock
Analyze side-by-side fundamentals, valuation, growth, and profitability to decide which stock is the better buy.
Selected Stocks
Add up to 10 tickers. Use presets or search to get started.
Quick Verdict
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth |  ELAB | 44.1% revenue growth vs AZTR's -100.0% |
| Stability / Safety |  AZTR | Beta 0.65 vs ELAB's 1.74 |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | AZTR | -91.7% vs ELAB's -96.5% |
| Efficiency (ROA) | AZTR | -0.2% ROA vs ELAB's -44.6%, ROIC -0.8% vs -82.7% |
Who Each Stock Is For
Income & stability
AZTRbeta 0.65
Growth exposure
ELABRev growth 44.1%, EPS growth 86.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 13.4%
Long-term compounding (10Y)
AZTR-100.0% 10Y total return vs ELAB's -100.0%
Sleep-well-at-night portfolio
AZTRLower volatility, beta 0.65, Low D/E 11.1%, current ratio 2.83x
Defensive / Recession hedge
AZTRBeta 0.65, current ratio 2.83x
Business Model
What each company does and how it makes money
Azitra is a preclinical biopharmaceutical company developing engineered bacterial therapies for rare and serious skin diseases. It aims to generate revenue through drug development partnerships and future product sales — though currently in preclinical stages without commercial revenue. The company's key advantage lies in its proprietary platform for engineering commensal skin bacteria to deliver therapeutic proteins directly to diseased skin.
PMGC Holdings is a biopharmaceutical company developing novel aesthetic medicines and therapeutic products, with a focus on engineered probiotics for muscle preservation during weight loss treatments. It generates revenue primarily through research and development activities, investment operations, and potential future commercialization of its lead product EL-22 — a first-in-class probiotic targeting obesity-related muscle loss. The company's competitive advantage lies in its proprietary engineered probiotic technology platform addressing an emerging need in the rapidly growing GLP-1 weight loss market.
Financial Metrics Comparison
Side-by-side fundamentals across 2 stocks. BestLagging
Financial Scorecard
AZTR 4ELAB 1ELAB1/1 metricsAZTR2/2 metricsAZTR6/8 metricsAZTR5/6 metricsAZTR2/2 metricsAZTR leads in 4 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). ELAB leads in 1 (Financial Metrics).
Financial Metrics (TTM)
AZTR and ELAB operate at a comparable scale, with $0 and -$1M in trailing revenue.
| Metric | AZTRAzitra, Inc. | ELABPMGC Holdings Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | -$1M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$11M | -$4M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$11M | -$7M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$86M | -$7M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +72.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -75.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -2.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -2.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -45.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -6.9% | +100.0% |
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | AZTRAzitra, Inc. | ELABPMGC Holdings Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $2M | $23,875 |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$1.6B | -$4M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.08x | -0.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 0.01x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | 0.00x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
AZTR delivers a -0.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-0 in annual profit, vs $-78 for ELAB. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ELAB scores 4/9 vs AZTR's 1/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | AZTRAzitra, Inc. | ELABPMGC Holdings Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -0.3% | -78.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.2% | -44.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.8% | -82.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.6% | -33.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.11x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$1.6B | -$4M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2.1B | $4M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $422M | $0 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -13.79x | -17.68x |
Total Returns (with DRIP)
A $10,000 investment in AZTR five years ago would be worth $2 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1 for ELAB. Over the past 12 months, AZTR leads with a -91.7% total return vs ELAB's -96.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AZTR at -94.2% vs ELAB's -96.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | AZTRAzitra, Inc. | ELABPMGC Holdings Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -32.1% | -26.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -91.7% | -96.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -100.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -100.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -100.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -94.2% | -96.0% |
Risk & Volatility
AZTR is the less volatile stock with a 0.65 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ELAB's 1.74 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AZTR currently trades 7.1% from its 52-week high vs ELAB's 3.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | AZTRAzitra, Inc. | ELABPMGC Holdings Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.65x | 1.74x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.66 | $30.50 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.15 | $1.01 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +7.1% | +3.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 35.7 | 16.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.4M | 1.6M |
Analyst Outlook
| Metric | AZTRAzitra, Inc. | ELABPMGC Holdings Inc. |
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
Historical Charts
Charts are rendered on first load. Hover for details.
Chart 1Total Return — 5 Years (Rebased to 100)
| Stock | Dec 23 | Mar 26 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Azitra, Inc. (AZTR) | 100 | 0.08 | -99.9% |
| PMGC Holdings Inc. (ELAB) | 84.12 | 0.01 | -100.0% |
Azitra, Inc. (AZTR) returned -100% over 5 years vs PMGC Holdings Inc. (ELAB)'s -100%.
Chart 2Revenue Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2020 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Azitra, Inc. (AZTR) | $110000.00 | $0.00 | -100.0% |
| PMGC Holdings Inc. (ELAB) | $0.00 | $2M | — |
Chart 3Net Margin Trend — 10 Years
| Stock | 2021 | 2024 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Azitra, Inc. (AZTR) | -81.3% | -119.6% | -47.1% |
| PMGC Holdings Inc. (ELAB) | -948.9% | -2.5% | +99.7% |
Azitra, Inc.'s net margin went from -81% (2021) to -120% (2024). PMGC Holdings Inc.'s net margin went from -949% (2021) to -3% (2024).
Chart 4EPS Growth — 10 Years
| Stock | 2020 | 2025 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Azitra, Inc. (AZTR) | -3.33 | -2.25 | +32.5% |
| PMGC Holdings Inc. (ELAB) | -0.08 | -274.68 | -332442.4% |
Chart 5Free Cash Flow — 5 Years
Azitra, Inc. generated $-11B FCF in 2025 (-128900% vs 2021). PMGC Holdings Inc. generated $-5M FCF in 2024 (-691% vs 2021).
AZTR vs ELAB: Frequently Asked Questions
6 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Which is the better long-term investment — AZTR or ELAB?
Over the past 5 years, Azitra, Inc. (AZTR) delivered a total return of -100.0%, compared to -100.0% for PMGC Holdings Inc. (ELAB). A $10,000 investment in AZTR five years ago would be worth approximately $2 today (assuming dividends reinvested). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AZTR returned -100.0% versus ELAB's -100.0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
02Which is safer — AZTR or ELAB?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Azitra, Inc. (AZTR) is the lower-risk stock at 0.65β versus PMGC Holdings Inc.'s 1.74β — meaning ELAB is approximately 168% more volatile than AZTR relative to the S&P 500.
03Which has better profit margins — AZTR or ELAB?
Azitra, Inc. (AZTR) is the more profitable company, earning 0.0% net margin versus -253.1% for PMGC Holdings Inc. — meaning it keeps 0.0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AZTR leads at 0.0% versus -75.7% for ELAB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ELAB leads at 72.8%, 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.
04Which pays a better dividend — AZTR or ELAB?
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.
05Is AZTR or ELAB better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Azitra, Inc. (AZTR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.65)). PMGC Holdings Inc. (ELAB) carries a higher beta of 1.74 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (AZTR: -100.0%, ELAB: -100.0%), 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.
06What are the main differences between AZTR and ELAB?
Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both. 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 beat both.