Medical - Care Facilities
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CCEL vs NTRA vs FATE vs BEAM vs CRSP
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
CCEL vs NTRA vs FATE vs BEAM vs CRSP — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Care Facilities | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $28M | $31.16B | $280M | $3.23B | $5.06B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $32M | $2.31B | $7M | $132M | $4M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $400K | $-208M | $-136M | $-65M | $-569M |
| Gross Margin | 77.1% | 64.8% | — | -64.2% | -41.7% |
| Operating Margin | 13.6% | -13.4% | -22.2% | -281.0% | -134.1% |
| Forward P/E | 69.0x | — | — | — | — |
| Total Debt | $13M | $214M | $78M | $294M | $395M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $561K | $1.08B | $47M | $295M | $355M |
CCEL vs NTRA vs FATE vs BEAM vs CRSP — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cryo-Cell Internati… (CCEL) | 100 | 46.6 | -53.4% |
| Natera, Inc. (NTRA) | 100 | 501.3 | +401.3% |
| Fate Therapeutics, … (FATE) | 100 | 7.5 | -92.5% |
| Beam Therapeutics I… (BEAM) | 100 | 123.2 | +23.2% |
| CRISPR Therapeutics… (CRSP) | 100 | 81.2 | -18.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CCEL vs NTRA vs FATE vs BEAM vs CRSP
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CCEL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.35, yield 7.1%
- Better valuation composite
- 1.3% margin vs CRSP's -138.6%
- Beta 0.35 vs FATE's 2.17
NTRA is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 20.9% 10Y total return vs CRSP's 272.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.26, Low D/E 12.5%, current ratio 3.39x
FATE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +143.0% vs CCEL's -26.1%
BEAM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 120.0%, EPS growth 82.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 31.9%
- 120.0% revenue growth vs CRSP's -90.0%
CRSP is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 1.93, current ratio 13.32x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 120.0% revenue growth vs CRSP's -90.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 1.3% margin vs CRSP's -138.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.35 vs FATE's 2.17 | |
| Dividends | 7.1% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +143.0% vs CCEL's -26.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 0.6% ROA vs FATE's -42.7% |
CCEL vs NTRA vs FATE vs BEAM vs CRSP — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CCEL vs NTRA vs FATE vs BEAM vs CRSP — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CCEL leads in 3 of 6 categories
NTRA leads 1 • FATE leads 0 • BEAM leads 0 • CRSP leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CCEL leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTRA is the larger business by revenue, generating $2.3B annually — 562.1x CRSP's $4M. CCEL is the more profitable business, keeping 1.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRSP's -138.6%. On growth, CRSP holds the edge at +68.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $32M | $2.3B | $7M | $132M | $4M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $6M | -$310M | -$148M | -$355M | -$535M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $399,609 | -$208M | -$136M | -$65M | -$569M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $6M | $97M | -$88M | -$384M | -$401M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +77.1% | +64.8% | — | -64.2% | -41.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +13.6% | -13.4% | -22.2% | -2.8% | -134.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +1.3% | -9.0% | -20.5% | -49.2% | -138.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +19.1% | +4.2% | -13.2% | -2.9% | -97.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -3.0% | +39.8% | -26.4% | -100.0% | +68.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -30.8% | +185.4% | +38.6% | +26.6% | +19.0% |
Valuation Metrics
CCEL leads this category, winning 2 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $28M | $31.2B | $280M | $3.2B | $5.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $40M | $30.3B | $312M | $3.2B | $5.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 69.00x | -144.62x | -2.11x | -38.85x | -8.10x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 10.13x | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.87x | 13.51x | 42.18x | 23.14x | 1440.41x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 17.55x | 1.39x | 2.51x | 2.45x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 7.70x | 285.53x | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CCEL leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BEAM delivers a -5.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-6 in annual profit, vs $-66 for FATE. NTRA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FATE's 0.38x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CCEL scores 7/9 vs CRSP's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -15.3% | -65.8% | -5.9% | -30.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.6% | -10.6% | -42.7% | -4.6% | -24.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -36.1% | -36.5% | -31.1% | -22.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +8.3% | -18.3% | -43.1% | -33.3% | -26.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 1 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.13x | 0.38x | 0.24x | 0.21x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $12M | -$862M | $31M | -$1M | $40M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $560,960 | $1.1B | $47M | $295M | $355M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $13M | $214M | $78M | $294M | $395M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 1.62x | -25.21x | — | 1.08x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NTRA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NTRA five years ago would be worth $21,587 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $318 for FATE. Over the past 12 months, FATE leads with a +143.0% total return vs CCEL's -26.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NTRA at 60.6% vs FATE's -23.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +0.6% | -3.9% | +145.5% | +16.0% | -2.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -26.1% | +37.3% | +143.0% | +93.9% | +53.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -15.5% | +314.0% | -55.4% | -5.6% | -6.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -41.2% | +115.9% | -96.8% | -55.6% | -51.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +61.3% | +2089.4% | +40.5% | +67.8% | +272.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -5.4% | +60.6% | -23.6% | -1.9% | -2.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CCEL and FATE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CCEL is the less volatile stock with a 0.35 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FATE's 2.17 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FATE currently trades 98.6% from its 52-week high vs CCEL's 54.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.35x | 1.26x | 2.17x | 2.14x | 1.93x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.35 | $256.36 | $2.46 | $36.44 | $78.48 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.72 | $131.81 | $0.91 | $15.35 | $33.50 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +54.3% | +85.7% | +98.6% | +86.4% | +66.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 49.9 | 57.1 | 81.0 | 60.9 | 55.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 12K | 1.3M | 1.9M | 2.0M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NTRA as "Buy", FATE as "Buy", BEAM as "Buy", CRSP as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 1525.5% upside for FATE (target: $40) vs 19.4% for NTRA (target: $263). CCEL is the only dividend payer here at 7.13% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $262.50 | $39.50 | $40.83 | $63.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 27 | 31 | 27 | 38 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +7.1% | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.25 | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +5.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
CCEL leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). NTRA leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
CCEL vs NTRA vs FATE vs BEAM vs CRSP: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CCEL or NTRA or FATE or BEAM or CRSP a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Beam Therapeutics Inc.
(BEAM) is the stronger pick with 120. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -90. 0% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP). Cryo-Cell International, Inc. (CCEL) offers the better valuation at 69. 0x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Natera, Inc. (NTRA) a "Buy" — based on 27 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 is the better long-term investment — CCEL or NTRA or FATE or BEAM or CRSP?
Over the past 5 years, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) delivered a total return of +115. 9%, compared to -96. 8% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NTRA returned +20. 9% versus FATE's +40. 5%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
03Which is safer — CCEL or NTRA or FATE or BEAM or CRSP?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cryo-Cell International, Inc.
(CCEL) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 35β versus Fate Therapeutics, Inc. 's 2. 17β — meaning FATE is approximately 518% more volatile than CCEL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Natera, Inc. (NTRA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 38% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — CCEL or NTRA or FATE or BEAM or CRSP?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Beam Therapeutics Inc.
(BEAM) is pulling ahead at 120. 0% versus -90. 0% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cryo-Cell International, Inc. grew EPS 104. 4% year-over-year, compared to -49. 1% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG. Over a 3-year CAGR, CRSP leads at 100. 4% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — CCEL or NTRA or FATE or BEAM or CRSP?
Cryo-Cell International, Inc.
(CCEL) is the more profitable company, earning 1. 3% net margin versus -165. 7% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG — meaning it keeps 1. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CCEL leads at 10. 9% versus -161. 9% for CRSP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BEAM leads at 84. 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — CCEL or NTRA or FATE or BEAM or CRSP?
In this comparison, CCEL (7.
1% yield) pays a dividend. NTRA, FATE, BEAM, CRSP do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is CCEL or NTRA or FATE or BEAM or CRSP better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cryo-Cell International, Inc.
(CCEL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 35), 7. 1% yield). Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE) carries a higher beta of 2. 17 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CCEL: +61. 3%, FATE: +40. 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.
08What are the main differences between CCEL and NTRA and FATE and BEAM and CRSP?
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: CCEL is a small-cap income-oriented stock; NTRA is a mid-cap high-growth stock; FATE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BEAM is a small-cap high-growth stock; CRSP is a small-cap quality compounder stock. CCEL pays a dividend while NTRA, FATE, BEAM, CRSP 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.