Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS vs NTRA vs AGEN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Healthcare Information Services
Medical - Instruments & Supplies
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Biotechnology
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS vs NTRA vs AGEN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Medical - Healthcare Information Services | Medical - Instruments & Supplies | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $523M | $2.89B | $1.13B | $31.16B | $132M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $217M | $643M | $100M | $2.31B | $114M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-10M | $-44M | $-10M | $-208M | $115K |
| Gross Margin | 53.0% | 69.1% | 64.0% | 64.8% | 35.7% |
| Operating Margin | -8.2% | -9.5% | -10.9% | -13.4% | -17.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 156.4x | — | 1.8x |
| Total Debt | $97M | $158M | $18M | $214M | $10M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $20M | $474M | $33M | $1.08B | $3M |
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS vs NTRA vs AGEN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cerus Corporation (CERS) | 100 | 42.0 | -58.0% |
| 10x Genomics, Inc. (TXG) | 100 | 28.8 | -71.2% |
| BioLife Solutions, … (BLFS) | 100 | 140.5 | +40.5% |
| Natera, Inc. (NTRA) | 100 | 501.3 | +401.3% |
| Agenus Inc. (AGEN) | 100 | 5.0 | -95.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CERS vs TXG vs BLFS vs NTRA vs AGEN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CERS lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
TXG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +169.8% vs BLFS's +8.3%
BLFS is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.67
- Lower volatility, beta 1.67, Low D/E 4.8%, current ratio 5.23x
- Beta 1.67, current ratio 5.23x
NTRA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 35.9%, EPS growth 0.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 41.1%
- 20.9% 10Y total return vs BLFS's 12.2%
- 35.9% revenue growth vs TXG's 5.2%
- Beta 1.26 vs AGEN's 2.72
AGEN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and quality.
- Better valuation composite
- 0.1% margin vs BLFS's -10.5%
- 0.1% ROA vs NTRA's -10.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 35.9% revenue growth vs TXG's 5.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 0.1% margin vs BLFS's -10.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.26 vs AGEN's 2.72 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +169.8% vs BLFS's +8.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 0.1% ROA vs NTRA's -10.6% |
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS vs NTRA vs AGEN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS vs NTRA vs AGEN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
BLFS leads in 2 of 6 categories
NTRA leads 2 • AGEN leads 1 • CERS leads 0 • TXG leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — TXG and NTRA each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTRA is the larger business by revenue, generating $2.3B annually — 23.1x BLFS's $100M. AGEN is the more profitable business, keeping 0.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to BLFS's -10.5%. On growth, NTRA holds the edge at +39.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $217M | $643M | $100M | $2.3B | $114M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$16M | -$29M | -$7M | -$310M | -$10M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$10M | -$44M | -$10M | -$208M | $115,000 |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$1M | $130M | $11M | $97M | -$159M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +53.0% | +69.1% | +64.0% | +64.8% | +35.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -8.2% | -9.5% | -10.9% | -13.4% | -17.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -4.4% | -6.8% | -10.5% | -9.0% | +0.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -0.6% | +20.2% | +10.6% | +4.2% | -139.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +24.1% | +0.6% | +14.9% | +39.8% | +27.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +75.7% | +67.5% | — | +185.4% | +85.3% |
Valuation Metrics
AGEN leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $523M | $2.9B | $1.1B | $31.2B | $132M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $600M | $2.6B | $1.1B | $30.3B | $140M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -31.83x | -64.06x | -92.48x | -144.62x | -1102.94x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 156.43x | — | 1.79x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.54x | 4.50x | 11.74x | 13.51x | 1.16x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.66x | 3.51x | 3.02x | 17.55x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 61.37x | 22.23x | 106.19x | 285.53x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
BLFS leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BLFS delivers a -2.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-3 in annual profit, vs $-15 for NTRA. BLFS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CERS's 1.49x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BLFS scores 6/9 vs TXG's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -15.2% | -5.7% | -2.9% | -15.3% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -4.4% | -4.4% | -2.6% | -10.6% | +0.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -19.7% | -17.9% | -2.8% | -36.1% | — |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -28.1% | -13.1% | -3.2% | -18.3% | — |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 5 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.49x | 0.20x | 0.05x | 0.13x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $77M | -$316M | -$15M | -$862M | $7M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $20M | $474M | $33M | $1.1B | $3M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $97M | $158M | $18M | $214M | $10M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -2.63x | -7374.83x | -18.62x | -25.21x | 1.11x |
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 $611 for AGEN. Over the past 12 months, TXG leads with a +169.8% total return vs BLFS's +8.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NTRA at 60.6% vs AGEN's -51.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +32.5% | +34.9% | -3.2% | -3.9% | +16.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +100.8% | +169.8% | +8.3% | +37.3% | +27.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +18.1% | -58.8% | +20.7% | +314.0% | -88.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -57.5% | -84.7% | -27.0% | +115.9% | -93.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -54.5% | -57.5% | +1221.1% | +2089.4% | -94.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +5.7% | -25.6% | +6.5% | +60.6% | -51.0% |
Risk & Volatility
NTRA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NTRA is the less volatile stock with a 1.26 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AGEN's 2.72 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NTRA currently trades 85.7% from its 52-week high vs AGEN's 51.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.13x | 2.32x | 1.67x | 1.26x | 2.72x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.15 | $26.45 | $29.62 | $256.36 | $7.34 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.15 | $7.72 | $17.86 | $131.81 | $2.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +82.9% | +84.8% | +78.1% | +85.7% | +51.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 70.6 | 53.0 | 56.7 | 57.1 | 48.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.2M | 2.3M | 422K | 1.3M | 814K |
Analyst Outlook
BLFS leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CERS as "Buy", TXG as "Hold", BLFS as "Buy", NTRA as "Buy", AGEN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 95.5% upside for AGEN (target: $7) vs -1.2% for TXG (target: $22).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $4.00 | $22.14 | $33.00 | $262.50 | $7.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 22 | 17 | 27 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | 2 | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% |
BLFS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). NTRA leads in 2 (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). 1 tied.
CERS vs TXG vs BLFS vs NTRA vs AGEN: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CERS or TXG or BLFS or NTRA or AGEN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is the stronger pick with 35. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 2% for 10x Genomics, Inc. (TXG). Analysts rate Cerus Corporation (CERS) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — CERS or TXG or BLFS or NTRA or AGEN?
Over the past 5 years, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) delivered a total return of +115. 9%, compared to -93. 9% for Agenus Inc. (AGEN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NTRA returned +20. 9% versus AGEN's -94. 3%. 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 — CERS or TXG or BLFS or NTRA or AGEN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 26β versus Agenus Inc. 's 2. 72β — meaning AGEN is approximately 117% more volatile than NTRA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, BioLife Solutions, Inc. (BLFS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 149% for Cerus Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — CERS or TXG or BLFS or NTRA or AGEN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is pulling ahead at 35. 9% versus 5. 2% for 10x Genomics, Inc. (TXG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Agenus Inc. grew EPS 100. 0% year-over-year, compared to 0. 7% for Natera, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NTRA leads at 41. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — CERS or TXG or BLFS or NTRA or AGEN?
Agenus Inc.
(AGEN) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 1% net margin versus -12. 6% for BioLife Solutions, Inc. — meaning it keeps 0. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: BLFS leads at -12. 6% versus -18. 0% for AGEN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AGEN leads at 90. 3%, 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.
06Is CERS or TXG or BLFS or NTRA or AGEN more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Agenus Inc.
(AGEN) trades at 1. 8x forward P/E versus 156. 4x for BioLife Solutions, Inc. — 154. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AGEN: 95. 5% to $7. 33.
07Which pays a better dividend — CERS or TXG or BLFS or NTRA or AGEN?
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.
08Is CERS or TXG or BLFS or NTRA or AGEN better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, BioLife Solutions, Inc.
(BLFS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+1221% 10Y return). Agenus Inc. (AGEN) carries a higher beta of 2. 72 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (BLFS: +1221%, AGEN: -94. 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.
09What are the main differences between CERS and TXG and BLFS and NTRA and AGEN?
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: CERS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TXG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; BLFS is a small-cap high-growth stock; NTRA is a mid-cap high-growth stock; AGEN is a small-cap quality compounder 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.