Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BCDA vs ADMA vs GRFS vs MCRB vs TAK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
BCDA vs ADMA vs GRFS vs MCRB vs TAK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic |
| Market Cap | $5M | $1.89B | $6.85B | $74M | $52.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $510M | $7.51B | $1M | $4.49T |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-9M | $165M | $401M | $-47M | $114.75B |
| Gross Margin | -74.6% | 61.3% | 38.4% | 16.0% | 62.1% |
| Operating Margin | -137.9% | 42.1% | 17.0% | -76.4% | 8.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | 9.7x | 9.4x | 12.0x | 0.2x |
| Total Debt | $951K | $80M | $8.74B | $83M | $4.52T |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2M | $88M | $825M | $46M | $385.11B |
BCDA vs ADMA vs GRFS vs MCRB vs TAK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| BioCardia, Inc. (BCDA) | 100 | 0.6 | -99.4% |
| ADMA Biologics, Inc. (ADMA) | 100 | 248.3 | +148.3% |
| Grifols, S.A. (GRFS) | 100 | 42.8 | -57.2% |
| Seres Therapeutics,… (MCRB) | 100 | 7.0 | -93.0% |
| Takeda Pharmaceutic… (TAK) | 100 | 84.4 | -15.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BCDA vs ADMA vs GRFS vs MCRB vs TAK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BCDA plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
ADMA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 19.6%, EPS growth -25.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 49.0%
- 34.8% 10Y total return vs TAK's -2.1%
- 19.6% revenue growth vs MCRB's -153.7%
- 32.4% margin vs BCDA's -137.0%
GRFS lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, MCRB doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
TAK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.33, yield 3.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.33, Low D/E 65.1%, current ratio 1.01x
- Beta 0.33, yield 3.6%, current ratio 1.01x
- Lower P/E (0.2x vs 12.0x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.6% revenue growth vs MCRB's -153.7% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.2x vs 12.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 32.4% margin vs BCDA's -137.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs MCRB's 1.73, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 3.6% yield, 2-year raise streak, vs GRFS's 2.6%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +19.7% vs ADMA's -61.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 27.4% ROA vs BCDA's -138.9% |
BCDA vs ADMA vs GRFS vs MCRB vs TAK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
BCDA vs ADMA vs GRFS vs MCRB vs TAK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TAK leads in 3 of 6 categories
ADMA leads 2 • GRFS leads 1 • BCDA leads 0 • MCRB leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TAK leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TAK and BCDA operate at a comparable scale, with $4.49T and $0 in trailing revenue. ADMA is the more profitable business, keeping 32.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BCDA's -137.0%. On growth, TAK holds the edge at +6.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $510M | $7.5B | $1M | $4.49T |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$8M | $221M | $1.6B | -$83M | $1.14T |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$9M | $165M | $401M | -$47M | $114.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$8M | $108M | $772M | -$42M | $956.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -74.6% | +61.3% | +38.4% | +16.0% | +62.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -137.9% | +42.1% | +17.0% | -76.4% | +8.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -137.0% | +32.4% | +5.3% | -40.9% | +2.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -138.5% | +21.2% | +10.3% | -36.9% | +21.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -0.3% | -0.6% | — | +6.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -386.3% | +72.7% | +40.0% | -155.5% | +3.4% |
Valuation Metrics
GRFS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.0x trailing earnings, MCRB trades at a 84% valuation discount to TAK's 76.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, GRFS's 8.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than TAK's 11.1x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5M | $1.9B | $6.9B | $74M | $52.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4M | $1.9B | $16.1B | $111M | $78.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.38x | 13.62x | 12.11x | 12.03x | 76.80x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 9.69x | 9.35x | — | 0.23x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 4.06x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 9.45x | 8.49x | — | 11.13x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 88.05x | 3.71x | 0.81x | 94.00x | 1.78x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.64x | 4.19x | 0.62x | 1.54x | 1.20x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 68.06x | 7.77x | 85.74x | 9.53x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ADMA leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ADMA delivers a 39.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $39 in annual profit, vs $-3 for BCDA. ADMA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.17x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MCRB's 1.88x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MCRB scores 7/9 vs BCDA's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.3% | +39.0% | +5.2% | -127.3% | +1.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -138.9% | +27.4% | +2.0% | -34.5% | +0.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +36.0% | +5.4% | -90.3% | +2.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -20.5% | +38.8% | +6.4% | -86.4% | +2.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.14x | 0.17x | 1.15x | 1.88x | 0.65x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$1M | -$8M | $7.9B | $37M | $4.13T |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2M | $88M | $825M | $46M | $385.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $951,000 | $80M | $8.7B | $83M | $4.52T |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 50.85x | 2.05x | — | 1.97x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ADMA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ADMA five years ago would be worth $48,922 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $72 for BCDA. Over the past 12 months, TAK leads with a +19.7% total return vs ADMA's -61.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ADMA at 32.7% vs BCDA's -77.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -12.6% | -54.3% | -12.3% | -49.2% | +7.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -61.1% | -61.5% | +13.4% | +10.6% | +19.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.8% | +133.4% | +9.5% | -93.1% | +7.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.3% | +389.2% | -53.6% | -98.1% | +15.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.7% | +34.8% | -35.2% | -98.5% | -2.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -77.0% | +32.7% | +3.1% | -58.9% | +2.4% |
Risk & Volatility
TAK leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TAK is the less volatile stock with a 0.33 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MCRB's 1.73 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TAK currently trades 87.1% from its 52-week high vs MCRB's 25.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.11x | 1.25x | 1.10x | 1.73x | 0.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.92 | $22.73 | $11.14 | $29.98 | $18.89 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.00 | $7.21 | $7.09 | $6.53 | $12.99 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +38.0% | +35.9% | +72.7% | +25.7% | +87.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.7 | 26.0 | 45.4 | 42.9 | 38.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 159K | 7.4M | 681K | 50K | 2.8M |
Analyst Outlook
TAK leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ADMA as "Buy", GRFS as "Buy", MCRB as "Buy", TAK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 157.0% upside for ADMA (target: $21) vs -83.8% for MCRB (target: $1). For income investors, TAK offers the higher dividend yield at 3.65% vs GRFS's 2.62%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $21.00 | — | $1.25 | — |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 10 | 8 | 18 | 6 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.6% | — | +3.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 1 | 2 | — | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $0.18 | — | $94.22 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.7% | +2.1% | 0.0% | +0.6% |
TAK leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Risk & Volatility). ADMA leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns).
BCDA vs ADMA vs GRFS vs MCRB vs TAK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BCDA or ADMA or GRFS or MCRB or TAK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, ADMA Biologics, Inc.
(ADMA) is the stronger pick with 19. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -87. 8% for BioCardia, Inc. (BCDA). Seres Therapeutics, Inc. (MCRB) offers the better valuation at 12. 0x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate ADMA Biologics, Inc. (ADMA) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — BCDA or ADMA or GRFS or MCRB or TAK?
On trailing P/E, Seres Therapeutics, Inc.
(MCRB) is the cheapest at 12. 0x versus Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited at 76. 8x. On forward P/E, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited is actually cheaper at 0. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BCDA or ADMA or GRFS or MCRB or TAK?
Over the past 5 years, ADMA Biologics, Inc.
(ADMA) delivered a total return of +389. 2%, compared to -99. 3% for BioCardia, Inc. (BCDA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ADMA returned +34. 8% versus BCDA's -99. 7%. 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 — BCDA or ADMA or GRFS or MCRB or TAK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited (TAK) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
33β versus Seres Therapeutics, Inc. 's 1. 73β — meaning MCRB is approximately 424% more volatile than TAK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, ADMA Biologics, Inc. (ADMA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 17% versus 188% for Seres Therapeutics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BCDA or ADMA or GRFS or MCRB or TAK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ADMA Biologics, Inc.
(ADMA) is pulling ahead at 19. 6% versus -87. 8% for BioCardia, Inc. (BCDA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Grifols, S. A. grew EPS 147. 8% year-over-year, compared to -26. 2% for Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited. Over a 3-year CAGR, ADMA leads at 49. 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 — BCDA or ADMA or GRFS or MCRB or TAK?
Seres Therapeutics, Inc.
(MCRB) is the more profitable company, earning 721. 9% net margin versus -137. 0% for BioCardia, Inc. — meaning it keeps 721. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ADMA leads at 37. 5% versus -137. 9% for BCDA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TAK leads at 65. 5%, 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 BCDA or ADMA or GRFS or MCRB or TAK more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited (TAK) trades at 0.
2x forward P/E versus 9. 7x for ADMA Biologics, Inc. — 9. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ADMA: 157. 0% to $21. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — BCDA or ADMA or GRFS or MCRB or TAK?
In this comparison, TAK (3.
6% yield), GRFS (2. 6% yield) pay a dividend. BCDA, ADMA, MCRB do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BCDA or ADMA or GRFS or MCRB or TAK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited (TAK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
33), 3. 6% yield). Seres Therapeutics, Inc. (MCRB) carries a higher beta of 1. 73 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (TAK: -2. 1%, MCRB: -98. 5%), 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 BCDA and ADMA and GRFS and MCRB and TAK?
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: BCDA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ADMA is a small-cap high-growth stock; GRFS is a small-cap deep-value stock; MCRB is a small-cap deep-value stock; TAK is a mid-cap income-oriented stock. GRFS, TAK pay a dividend while BCDA, ADMA, MCRB 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.