Drug Manufacturers - General
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV vs REGN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Biotechnology
BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV vs REGN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - General | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $114.66B | $1690.08T | $275.10B | $356.49B | $74.28B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $48.48B | $0.00 | $64.93B | $61.16B | $14.92B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $7.28B | $-168M | $18.25B | $4.23B | $4.42B |
| Gross Margin | 68.7% | — | 74.2% | 70.2% | 84.5% |
| Operating Margin | 25.7% | — | 41.1% | 26.7% | 24.3% |
| Forward P/E | 8.9x | — | 21.7x | 14.2x | 15.5x |
| Total Debt | $47.14B | $22M | $50.53B | $69.07B | $2.71B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $10.21B | $194M | $14.56B | $5.23B | $3.12B |
BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV vs REGN — 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 | 94.0 | -6.0% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 40.7 | -59.3% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 144.7 | +44.7% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 217.5 | +117.5% |
| Regeneron Pharmaceu… (REGN) | 100 | 116.7 | +16.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV vs REGN
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 defensive.
- Beta 0.45, yield 4.4%, current ratio 1.26x
- Lower P/E (8.9x vs 15.5x)
- 4.4% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs MRK's 2.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
DBVT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +100.5% vs ABBV's +12.2%
MRK is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.02 vs REGN's 2.44
- 14.6% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0%
ABBV is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.28, yield 3.3%
- 293.8% 10Y total return vs MRK's 164.7%
- 8.6% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0%
- Beta 0.28 vs DBVT's 1.26
REGN is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 1.0%, EPS growth 8.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.77, Low D/E 8.7%, current ratio 4.13x
- 29.6% margin vs DBVT's 0.3%
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 15.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.6% margin vs DBVT's 0.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.28 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) | +100.5% vs ABBV's +12.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.6% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0% |
BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV vs REGN — 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 vs REGN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
REGN leads in 2 of 6 categories
BMY leads 1 • ABBV leads 1 • DBVT leads 0 • MRK leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
REGN leads this category, winning 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. REGN is the more profitable business, keeping 29.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ABBV's 6.9%. On growth, REGN holds the edge at +19.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $48.5B | $0 | $64.9B | $61.2B | $14.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $15.7B | -$112M | $32.4B | $24.5B | $4.2B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $7.3B | -$168M | $18.3B | $4.2B | $4.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $11.9B | -$151M | $12.4B | $18.7B | $4.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +68.7% | — | +74.2% | +70.2% | +84.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +25.7% | — | +41.1% | +26.7% | +24.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +15.0% | — | +28.1% | +6.9% | +29.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +24.6% | — | +19.0% | +30.6% | +27.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.6% | — | +4.5% | +10.0% | +19.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.2% | +91.5% | -19.6% | +57.4% | -7.2% |
Valuation Metrics
BMY leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.3x trailing earnings, MRK trades at a 82% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MRK offers better value at 0.72x vs REGN's 2.72x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $114.7B | $1690.08T | $275.1B | $356.5B | $74.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $151.6B | $1690.08T | $311.1B | $420.3B | $73.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 16.28x | -0.75x | 15.30x | 85.04x | 17.23x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 8.91x | — | 21.69x | 14.17x | 15.46x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.72x | — | 2.72x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9.16x | — | 10.61x | 14.89x | 17.92x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.38x | — | 4.24x | 5.83x | 5.18x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.19x | 0.65x | 5.30x | — | 2.48x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 8.93x | — | 22.26x | 20.01x | 18.20x |
Profitability & Efficiency
REGN leads this category, winning 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. REGN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.09x 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% | +14.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +7.9% | -89.0% | +14.6% | +3.1% | +11.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +16.9% | — | +22.0% | +23.9% | +8.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +18.7% | -145.7% | +23.8% | +21.5% | +10.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 2.55x | 0.13x | 0.96x | — | 0.09x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $36.9B | -$172M | $36.0B | $63.8B | -$412M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $10.2B | $194M | $14.6B | $5.2B | $3.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $47.1B | $22M | $50.5B | $69.1B | $2.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 10.33x | -189.82x | 19.68x | 3.28x | 108.44x |
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 $19,956 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,172 for DBVT. Over the past 12 months, DBVT leads with a +100.5% total return vs ABBV's +12.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ABBV at 14.4% vs BMY's -2.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.4% | +3.6% | +5.4% | -10.6% | -7.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +25.1% | +100.5% | +47.7% | +12.2% | +31.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -7.3% | +18.1% | +2.1% | +49.7% | -4.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4.7% | -68.3% | +69.5% | +99.6% | +43.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.6% | -87.1% | +164.7% | +293.8% | +91.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -2.5% | +5.7% | +0.7% | +14.4% | -1.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — BMY and ABBV each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABBV is the less volatile stock with a 0.28 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. BMY currently trades 89.3% from its 52-week high vs DBVT's 75.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.45x | 1.26x | 0.45x | 0.28x | 0.77x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $62.89 | $26.18 | $125.14 | $244.81 | $821.11 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $42.52 | $7.53 | $73.31 | $176.57 | $476.49 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +89.3% | +75.3% | +89.0% | +82.3% | +87.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.4 | 47.4 | 43.7 | 43.9 | 41.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 10.2M | 252K | 7.2M | 5.8M | 626K |
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", REGN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 134.8% upside for DBVT (target: $46) vs 10.4% for BMY (target: $62). For income investors, BMY offers the higher dividend yield at 4.40% vs REGN's 0.48%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $62.00 | $46.33 | $129.31 | $256.69 | $865.68 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 41 | 15 | 37 | 41 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +4.4% | — | +2.9% | +3.3% | +0.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 6 | 0 | 14 | 13 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $2.47 | — | $3.26 | $6.57 | $3.41 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +1.8% | +0.3% | +5.3% |
REGN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). BMY leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
BMY vs DBVT vs MRK vs ABBV vs REGN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV or REGN 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. 3x trailing P/E (21. 7x 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 or REGN?
On trailing P/E, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the cheapest at 15. 3x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 0x. On forward P/E, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company is actually cheaper at 8. 9x — 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: Merck & Co. , Inc. wins at 1. 02x versus Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 2. 44x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV or REGN?
Over the past 5 years, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) delivered a total return of +99. 6%, compared to -68. 3% for DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABBV returned +293. 8% versus DBVT's -87. 1%. 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 or REGN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 28β versus DBV Technologies S. A. 's 1. 26β — meaning DBVT is approximately 357% more volatile than ABBV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (REGN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 9% 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 or REGN?
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, REGN leads at 5. 6% 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 or REGN?
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(REGN) is the more profitable company, earning 31. 4% net margin versus 0. 0% for DBV Technologies S. A. — meaning it keeps 31. 4% 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 — REGN leads at 85. 4%, 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 or REGN 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, Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 02x versus Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 2. 44x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMY) trades at 8. 9x forward P/E versus 21. 7x for Merck & Co. , Inc. — 12. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DBVT: 134. 8% to $46. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — BMY or DBVT or MRK or ABBV or REGN?
In this comparison, BMY (4.
4% yield), ABBV (3. 3% yield), MRK (2. 9% yield), REGN (0. 5% 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 or REGN 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. 28), 3. 3% yield, +293. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABBV: +293. 8%, DBVT: -87. 1%), 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 and REGN?
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; REGN is a mid-cap deep-value stock. BMY, MRK, ABBV pay a dividend while DBVT, REGN 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.