Drug Manufacturers - General
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - General | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $114.85B | $1712.35T | $277.34B | $358.42B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $48.48B | $0.00 | $64.93B | $61.16B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $7.28B | $-168M | $18.25B | $4.23B |
| Gross Margin | 68.7% | — | 74.2% | 70.2% |
| Operating Margin | 25.7% | — | 41.1% | 26.7% |
| Forward P/E | 8.9x | — | 21.9x | 14.3x |
| Total Debt | $47.14B | $22M | $50.53B | $69.07B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $10.21B | $194M | $14.56B | $5.23B |
BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bristol-Myers Squib… (BMY) | 100 | 94.2 | -5.8% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 41.2 | -58.8% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 145.9 | +45.9% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 218.7 | +118.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
BMY has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in value and dividends.
- Lower P/E (8.9x vs 14.3x)
- 4.4% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs MRK's 2.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
DBVT is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +110.4% vs ABBV's +11.3%
MRK is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Rev growth 1.2%, EPS growth 8.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 3.1%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.48, Low D/E 96.0%, current ratio 1.54x
- 28.1% margin vs DBVT's 0.3%
- 14.6% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0%
ABBV is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.34, yield 3.2%
- 295.5% 10Y total return vs MRK's 166.5%
- Beta 0.34, yield 3.2%, current ratio 0.67x
- 8.6% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.6% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.9x vs 14.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 28.1% margin vs DBVT's 0.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.34 vs DBVT's 1.26 | |
| Dividends | 4.4% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs MRK's 2.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +110.4% vs ABBV's +11.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.6% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0% |
BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BMY leads in 1 of 6 categories
ABBV leads 1 • DBVT leads 0 • MRK leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — MRK and ABBV each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK and DBVT operate at a comparable scale, with $64.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. MRK is the more profitable business, keeping 28.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ABBV's 6.9%. On growth, ABBV holds the edge at +10.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $48.5B | $0 | $64.9B | $61.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $15.7B | -$112M | $32.4B | $24.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $7.3B | -$168M | $18.3B | $4.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $11.9B | -$151M | $12.4B | $18.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +68.7% | — | +74.2% | +70.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +25.7% | — | +41.1% | +26.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.0% | — | +28.1% | +6.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +24.6% | — | +19.0% | +30.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.6% | — | +4.5% | +10.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.2% | +91.5% | -19.6% | +57.4% |
Valuation Metrics
BMY leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.4x trailing earnings, MRK trades at a 82% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.5x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, BMY's 9.2x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ABBV's 15.0x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $114.8B | $1712.35T | $277.3B | $358.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $151.8B | $1712.35T | $313.3B | $422.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 16.30x | -0.76x | 15.42x | 85.50x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 8.93x | — | 21.93x | 14.28x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.73x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.17x | — | 10.68x | 14.96x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.38x | — | 4.27x | 5.86x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.20x | 0.66x | 5.35x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 8.94x | — | 22.44x | 20.12x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — DBVT and MRK each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ABBV delivers a 62.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $62 in annual profit, vs $-130 for DBVT. DBVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BMY's 2.55x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BMY scores 8/9 vs MRK's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +39.0% | -130.2% | +36.1% | +62.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +7.9% | -89.0% | +14.6% | +3.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +16.9% | — | +22.0% | +23.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +18.7% | -145.7% | +23.8% | +21.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.55x | 0.13x | 0.96x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $36.9B | -$172M | $36.0B | $63.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $10.2B | $194M | $14.6B | $5.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $47.1B | $22M | $50.5B | $69.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 10.33x | -189.82x | 19.68x | 3.28x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ABBV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABBV five years ago would be worth $20,131 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,090 for DBVT. Over the past 12 months, DBVT leads with a +110.4% total return vs ABBV's +11.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ABBV at 14.6% vs BMY's -2.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.6% | +4.9% | +6.3% | -10.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +23.4% | +110.4% | +46.1% | +11.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -7.1% | +19.7% | +2.9% | +50.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +5.2% | -69.1% | +70.2% | +101.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.7% | -87.0% | +166.5% | +295.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -2.4% | +6.2% | +0.9% | +14.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MRK and ABBV each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABBV is the less volatile stock with a 0.34 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than DBVT's 1.26 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MRK currently trades 89.7% from its 52-week high vs DBVT's 76.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.50x | 1.26x | 0.48x | 0.34x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $62.89 | $26.18 | $125.14 | $244.81 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $42.52 | $7.53 | $73.31 | $176.57 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.4% | +76.3% | +89.7% | +82.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 41.4 | 48.1 | 46.7 | 46.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 10.3M | 252K | 7.3M | 5.8M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — BMY and MRK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: BMY as "Hold", DBVT as "Buy", MRK as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 131.8% upside for DBVT (target: $46) vs 10.2% for BMY (target: $62). For income investors, BMY offers the higher dividend yield at 4.39% vs MRK's 2.90%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $62.00 | $46.33 | $129.31 | $256.64 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 41 | 15 | 37 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +4.4% | — | +2.9% | +3.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 6 | 0 | 14 | 13 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.47 | — | $3.26 | $6.57 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +1.8% | +0.3% |
BMY leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). ABBV leads in 1 (Total Returns). 4 tied.
BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the stronger pick with 8. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 2% for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMY). Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) offers the better valuation at 15. 4x trailing P/E (21. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT) a "Buy" — based on 15 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 — BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV?
On trailing P/E, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the cheapest at 15. 4x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 5x. On forward P/E, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company is actually cheaper at 8. 9x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV?
Over the past 5 years, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) delivered a total return of +101. 3%, compared to -69. 1% for DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABBV returned +295. 5% versus DBVT's -87. 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 — BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 34β versus DBV Technologies S. A. 's 1. 26β — meaning DBVT is approximately 272% more volatile than ABBV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 3% for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is pulling ahead at 8. 6% versus -0. 2% for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMY). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Bristol-Myers Squibb Company grew EPS 178. 2% year-over-year, compared to -347. 5% for DBV Technologies S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MRK leads at 3. 1% 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 — BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV?
Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the more profitable company, earning 28. 1% net margin versus 0. 0% for DBV Technologies S. A. — meaning it keeps 28. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MRK leads at 36. 2% versus 0. 0% for DBVT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MRK leads at 72. 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 BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMY) trades at 8.
9x forward P/E versus 21. 9x for Merck & Co. , Inc. — 13. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DBVT: 131. 8% to $46. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV?
In this comparison, BMY (4.
4% yield), ABBV (3. 2% yield), MRK (2. 9% yield) pay a dividend. DBVT does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 34), 3. 2% yield, +295. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABBV: +295. 5%, DBVT: -87. 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.
10What are the main differences between BMY and DBVT and MRK and ABBV?
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: BMY is a mid-cap deep-value stock; DBVT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock; ABBV is a large-cap income-oriented stock. BMY, MRK, ABBV pay a dividend while DBVT does 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.