Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BCYC vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV vs MEDP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
BCYC vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV vs MEDP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $339M | $9.63B | $8.98B | $30.32B | $12.24B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $63M | $-92K | $4.03B | $16.63B | $2.68B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-219M | $-327M | $-185M | $1.39B | $460M |
| Gross Margin | -13.3% | — | 24.9% | 26.1% | 29.1% |
| Operating Margin | -381.6% | — | 11.8% | 13.9% | 21.0% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 16.4x | 14.1x | 25.2x |
| Total Debt | $18M | $110K | $3.07B | $16.17B | $250M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $628M | $357M | $214M | $1.98B | $497M |
BCYC vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV vs MEDP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bicycle Therapeutic… (BCYC) | 100 | 26.4 | -73.6% |
| Praxis Precision Me… (PRAX) | 100 | 63.5 | -36.5% |
| Charles River Labor… (CRL) | 100 | 79.9 | -20.1% |
| IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) | 100 | 116.0 | +16.0% |
| Medpace Holdings, I… (MEDP) | 100 | 386.4 | +286.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BCYC vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV vs MEDP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BCYC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 105.8%, EPS growth -9.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 71.2%
- 105.8% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0%
PRAX ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +7.7% vs BCYC's -37.1%
Among these 5 stocks, CRL doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
IQV is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.33
- PEG 0.35 vs MEDP's 0.79
- Lower P/E (14.1x vs 25.2x), PEG 0.35 vs 0.79
MEDP carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 14.4% 10Y total return vs IQV's 166.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.26, Low D/E 54.6%, current ratio 0.74x
- Beta 1.26, current ratio 0.74x
- 17.2% margin vs BCYC's -345.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 105.8% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.1x vs 25.2x), PEG 0.35 vs 0.79 | |
| Quality / Margins | 17.2% margin vs BCYC's -345.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.26 vs BCYC's 1.65 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +7.7% vs BCYC's -37.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 24.8% ROA vs PRAX's -40.2%, ROIC 154.9% vs -65.0% |
BCYC vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV vs MEDP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
BCYC vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV vs MEDP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MEDP leads in 2 of 6 categories
IQV leads 2 • PRAX leads 1 • BCYC leads 0 • CRL leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MEDP leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IQV and PRAX operate at a comparable scale, with $16.6B and -$92,000 in trailing revenue. MEDP is the more profitable business, keeping 17.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BCYC's -3.4%. On growth, MEDP holds the edge at +26.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $63M | -$92,000 | $4.0B | $16.6B | $2.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$238M | -$357M | $757M | $3.5B | $577M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$219M | -$327M | -$185M | $1.4B | $460M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$229M | -$283M | $391M | $2.7B | $745M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -13.3% | — | +24.9% | +26.1% | +29.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -3.8% | — | +11.8% | +13.9% | +21.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.4% | — | -4.6% | +8.3% | +17.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -3.6% | — | +9.7% | +16.1% | +27.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -91.1% | — | +1.2% | +8.4% | +26.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.1% | +2.7% | -160.0% | +15.0% | +16.6% |
Valuation Metrics
IQV leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 22.8x trailing earnings, IQV trades at a 19% valuation discount to MEDP's 28.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IQV offers better value at 0.56x vs MEDP's 0.88x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $339M | $9.6B | $9.0B | $30.3B | $12.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$272M | $9.3B | $11.8B | $44.5B | $12.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.55x | -24.72x | -62.52x | 22.79x | 28.06x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 16.42x | 14.06x | 25.24x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.56x | 0.88x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 12.98x | 12.97x | 21.31x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.67x | — | 2.24x | 1.86x | 4.84x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.56x | 8.54x | 2.81x | 4.67x | 27.57x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 17.31x | 14.78x | 17.96x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MEDP leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MEDP delivers a 120.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $121 in annual profit, vs $-43 for PRAX. PRAX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IQV's 2.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MEDP scores 6/9 vs BCYC's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -35.7% | -43.0% | -5.7% | +22.1% | +120.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -29.5% | -40.2% | -2.5% | +4.7% | +24.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -65.0% | +6.3% | +8.7% | +154.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -32.0% | -49.3% | +8.1% | +11.0% | +65.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.03x | 0.00x | 0.95x | 2.44x | 0.55x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$611M | -$357M | $2.9B | $14.2B | -$247M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $628M | $357M | $214M | $2.0B | $497M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $18M | $110,000 | $3.1B | $16.2B | $250M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -1465.53x | — | 6.38x | 3.10x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PRAX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MEDP five years ago would be worth $25,938 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,540 for BCYC. Over the past 12 months, PRAX leads with a +775.0% total return vs BCYC's -37.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PRAX at 174.9% vs BCYC's -39.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -26.8% | +16.4% | -10.1% | -20.7% | -24.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -37.1% | +775.0% | +32.8% | +16.5% | +42.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -77.4% | +1976.5% | -4.2% | -5.9% | +104.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -84.6% | -20.8% | -46.9% | -23.8% | +159.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -59.3% | -20.1% | +119.2% | +166.5% | +1442.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -39.1% | +174.9% | -1.4% | -2.0% | +27.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PRAX and MEDP each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MEDP is the less volatile stock with a 1.26 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BCYC's 1.65 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PRAX currently trades 93.6% from its 52-week high vs BCYC's 52.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.65x | 1.55x | 1.52x | 1.33x | 1.26x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.36 | $356.00 | $228.88 | $247.05 | $628.92 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $4.24 | $35.18 | $131.30 | $134.65 | $284.48 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +52.2% | +93.6% | +79.5% | +72.3% | +68.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.0 | 55.6 | 57.2 | 58.5 | 40.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 464K | 378K | 806K | 1.6M | 371K |
Analyst Outlook
IQV leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BCYC as "Buy", PRAX as "Buy", CRL as "Buy", IQV as "Buy", MEDP as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 118.2% upside for BCYC (target: $11) vs 12.9% for CRL (target: $205).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $10.67 | $544.40 | $205.43 | $225.63 | $498.86 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 21 | 16 | 36 | 44 | 19 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 1 | 2 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.0% | +4.1% | +7.5% |
MEDP leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). IQV leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
BCYC vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV vs MEDP: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BCYC or PRAX or CRL or IQV or MEDP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Bicycle Therapeutics plc (BCYC) is the stronger pick with 105.
8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) offers the better valuation at 22. 8x trailing P/E (14. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Bicycle Therapeutics plc (BCYC) a "Buy" — based on 21 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 — BCYC or PRAX or CRL or IQV or MEDP?
On trailing P/E, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the cheapest at 22. 8x versus Medpace Holdings, Inc. at 28. 1x. On forward P/E, IQVIA Holdings Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: IQVIA Holdings Inc. wins at 0. 35x versus Medpace Holdings, Inc. 's 0. 79x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BCYC or PRAX or CRL or IQV or MEDP?
Over the past 5 years, Medpace Holdings, Inc.
(MEDP) delivered a total return of +159. 4%, compared to -84. 6% for Bicycle Therapeutics plc (BCYC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MEDP returned +1443% versus BCYC's -59. 3%. 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 — BCYC or PRAX or CRL or IQV or MEDP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Medpace Holdings, Inc.
(MEDP) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 26β versus Bicycle Therapeutics plc's 1. 65β — meaning BCYC is approximately 32% more volatile than MEDP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 2% for IQVIA Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BCYC or PRAX or CRL or IQV or MEDP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Bicycle Therapeutics plc (BCYC) is pulling ahead at 105.
8% versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Medpace Holdings, Inc. grew EPS 21. 0% year-over-year, compared to -1555. 0% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, BCYC leads at 71. 2% 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 — BCYC or PRAX or CRL or IQV or MEDP?
Medpace Holdings, Inc.
(MEDP) is the more profitable company, earning 17. 8% net margin versus -301. 7% for Bicycle Therapeutics plc — meaning it keeps 17. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MEDP leads at 21. 1% versus -341. 3% for BCYC. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BCYC 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.
07Is BCYC or PRAX or CRL or IQV or MEDP 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, IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus Medpace Holdings, Inc. 's 0. 79x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) trades at 14. 1x forward P/E versus 25. 2x for Medpace Holdings, Inc. — 11. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BCYC: 118. 2% to $10. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — BCYC or PRAX or CRL or IQV or MEDP?
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 BCYC or PRAX or CRL or IQV or MEDP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Medpace Holdings, Inc.
(MEDP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 26), +1443% 10Y return). Bicycle Therapeutics plc (BCYC) carries a higher beta of 1. 65 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MEDP: +1443%, BCYC: -59. 3%), 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 BCYC and PRAX and CRL and IQV and MEDP?
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: BCYC is a small-cap high-growth stock; PRAX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CRL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IQV is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MEDP is a mid-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.