Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CANF vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL vs IQV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
CANF vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL vs IQV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $26M | $2.50B | $5.53B | $8.98B | $30.32B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $560K | $236M | $0.00 | $4.03B | $16.63B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-9M | $-369M | $-464M | $-185M | $1.39B |
| Gross Margin | 100.0% | 90.7% | — | 24.9% | 26.1% |
| Operating Margin | -16.0% | -168.6% | — | 11.8% | 13.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 16.4x | 14.1x |
| Total Debt | $104K | $99M | $98K | $3.07B | $16.17B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $222M | $714M | $214M | $1.98B |
CANF vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL vs IQV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Can-Fite BioPharma … (CANF) | 100 | 16.5 | -83.5% |
| Arcus Biosciences, … (RCUS) | 100 | 79.1 | -20.9% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 106.1 | +6.1% |
| Charles River Labor… (CRL) | 100 | 101.3 | +1.3% |
| IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) | 100 | 119.5 | +19.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CANF vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL vs IQV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CANF is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.88, Low D/E 1.9%, current ratio 4.38x
- Beta 0.88, current ratio 4.38x
- Beta 0.88 vs RCUS's 1.95, lower leverage
- +221.8% vs IQV's +16.5%
RCUS plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 173.6% 10Y total return vs IQV's 166.5%
Among these 5 stocks, CRL doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
IQV carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.33
- Rev growth 5.9%, EPS growth 4.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.2%
- 5.9% revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3%
- Lower P/E (14.1x vs 16.4x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.9% revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.1x vs 16.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.3% margin vs CANF's -15.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.88 vs RCUS's 1.95, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +221.8% vs IQV's +16.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.7% ROA vs CANF's -114.0%, ROIC 8.7% vs -448.3% |
CANF vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL vs IQV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
CANF vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL vs IQV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IQV leads in 4 of 6 categories
CANF leads 1 • RCUS leads 0 • IMVT leads 0 • CRL leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IQV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IQV and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $16.6B and $0 in trailing revenue. IQV is the more profitable business, keeping 8.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CANF's -15.7%. On growth, IQV holds the edge at +8.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $560,000 | $236M | $0 | $4.0B | $16.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$9M | -$391M | -$487M | $757M | $3.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$9M | -$369M | -$464M | -$185M | $1.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$8M | -$489M | -$423M | $391M | $2.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +100.0% | +90.7% | — | +24.9% | +26.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -16.0% | -168.6% | — | +11.8% | +13.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -15.7% | -156.4% | — | -4.6% | +8.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -14.9% | -2.1% | — | +9.7% | +16.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -36.1% | -39.3% | — | +1.2% | +8.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +36.4% | +10.5% | +19.7% | -160.0% | +15.0% |
Valuation Metrics
IQV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, IQV's 13.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than CRL's 13.0x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $26M | $2.5B | $5.5B | $9.0B | $30.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $21M | $2.4B | $4.8B | $11.8B | $44.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -3.28x | -7.54x | -9.97x | -62.52x | 22.79x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 16.42x | 14.06x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 0.56x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 12.98x | 12.97x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 38.09x | 10.11x | — | 2.24x | 1.86x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.72x | 4.22x | 5.83x | 2.81x | 4.67x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 17.31x | 14.78x |
Profitability & Efficiency
IQV leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IQV delivers a 22.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $-2 for CANF. IMVT 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), CRL scores 4/9 vs RCUS's 0/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.1% | -69.0% | -47.1% | -5.7% | +22.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -114.0% | -35.3% | -44.1% | -2.5% | +4.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -4.5% | -64.1% | — | +6.3% | +8.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -108.1% | -42.1% | -66.1% | +8.1% | +11.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.16x | 0.00x | 0.95x | 2.44x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5M | -$123M | -$714M | $2.9B | $14.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $222M | $714M | $214M | $2.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $104,000 | $99M | $98,000 | $3.1B | $16.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -580.71x | -13.38x | — | 6.38x | 3.10x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CANF leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IMVT five years ago would be worth $16,241 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,735 for CANF. Over the past 12 months, CANF leads with a +221.8% total return vs IQV's +16.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CANF at 19.9% vs IQV's -2.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +1509.1% | +6.5% | +5.1% | -10.1% | -20.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +221.8% | +209.6% | +96.1% | +32.8% | +16.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +72.3% | +24.9% | +40.9% | -4.2% | -5.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -82.6% | -18.6% | +62.4% | -46.9% | -23.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.1% | +45.9% | +173.6% | +119.2% | +166.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +19.9% | +7.7% | +12.1% | -1.4% | -2.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CANF and IMVT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CANF is the less volatile stock with a 0.88 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RCUS's 1.95 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IMVT currently trades 90.5% from its 52-week high vs CANF's 34.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.88x | 1.95x | 1.37x | 1.52x | 1.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.40 | $28.72 | $30.09 | $228.88 | $247.05 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.17 | $7.06 | $13.36 | $131.30 | $134.65 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +34.0% | +86.3% | +90.5% | +79.5% | +72.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.6 | 60.5 | 60.2 | 57.2 | 58.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.4M | 1.2M | 1.4M | 806K | 1.6M |
Analyst Outlook
IQV leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CANF as "Buy", RCUS as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", CRL as "Buy", IQV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 104.8% upside for CANF (target: $7) vs 12.9% for CRL (target: $205).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $7.25 | $30.00 | $45.50 | $205.43 | $225.63 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 18 | 23 | 36 | 44 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 1 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.0% | +4.1% |
IQV leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). CANF leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
CANF vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL vs IQV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CANF or RCUS or IMVT or CRL or IQV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the stronger pick with 5. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -9. 3% for Can-Fite BioPharma Ltd. (CANF). 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 Can-Fite BioPharma Ltd. (CANF) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — CANF or RCUS or IMVT or CRL or IQV?
On forward P/E, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
is actually cheaper at 14. 1x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CANF or RCUS or IMVT or CRL or IQV?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +62. 4%, compared to -82. 6% for Can-Fite BioPharma Ltd. (CANF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +173. 6% versus CANF's -99. 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 — CANF or RCUS or IMVT or CRL or IQV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Can-Fite BioPharma Ltd.
(CANF) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 88β versus Arcus Biosciences, Inc. 's 1. 95β — meaning RCUS is approximately 122% more volatile than CANF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) 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 — CANF or RCUS or IMVT or CRL or IQV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is pulling ahead at 5. 9% versus -9. 3% for Can-Fite BioPharma Ltd. (CANF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Can-Fite BioPharma Ltd. grew EPS 40. 0% year-over-year, compared to -1555. 0% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, RCUS leads at 30. 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 — CANF or RCUS or IMVT or CRL or IQV?
IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 3% net margin versus -1169. 1% for Can-Fite BioPharma Ltd. — meaning it keeps 8. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IQV leads at 14. 0% versus -1206. 2% for CANF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CANF 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 CANF or RCUS or IMVT or CRL or IQV more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) trades at 14. 1x forward P/E versus 16. 4x for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. — 2. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CANF: 104. 8% to $7. 25.
08Which pays a better dividend — CANF or RCUS or IMVT or CRL or IQV?
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 CANF or RCUS or IMVT or CRL or IQV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Can-Fite BioPharma Ltd.
(CANF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 88)). Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) carries a higher beta of 1. 95 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CANF: -99. 1%, RCUS: +45. 9%), 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 CANF and RCUS and IMVT and CRL and IQV?
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 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.