Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CGON vs AZN vs MRK vs BMY vs IQV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
CGON vs AZN vs MRK vs BMY vs IQV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $5.84B | $282.96B | $277.34B | $114.85B | $30.32B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $4M | $60.44B | $64.93B | $48.48B | $16.63B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-161M | $10.39B | $18.25B | $7.28B | $1.39B |
| Gross Margin | -15.0% | 81.7% | 74.2% | 68.7% | 26.1% |
| Operating Margin | -47.2% | 23.7% | 41.1% | 25.7% | 13.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 17.7x | 21.9x | 8.9x | 14.1x |
| Total Debt | $7M | $29.70B | $50.53B | $47.14B | $16.17B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $32M | $5.71B | $14.56B | $10.21B | $1.98B |
CGON vs AZN vs MRK vs BMY vs IQV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jan 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| CG Oncology, Inc. C… (CGON) | 100 | 185.7 | +85.7% |
| AstraZeneca PLC (AZN) | 100 | 137.9 | +37.9% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 93.0 | -7.0% |
| Bristol-Myers Squib… (BMY) | 100 | 115.1 | +15.1% |
| IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) | 100 | 85.8 | -14.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CGON vs AZN vs MRK vs BMY vs IQV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CGON is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth and momentum is your priority.
- 254.7% revenue growth vs BMY's -0.2%
- +209.7% vs IQV's +16.5%
AZN is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 8.6%, EPS growth 190.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 9.8%
- 268.6% 10Y total return vs CGON's 86.1%
MRK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.48, yield 2.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.48, Low D/E 96.0%, current ratio 1.54x
- Beta 0.48, yield 2.9%, current ratio 1.54x
- 28.1% margin vs CGON's -39.9%
BMY ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value and dividends.
- Lower P/E (8.9x vs 21.9x)
- 4.4% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs MRK's 2.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
IQV is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.35 vs MRK's 1.03
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 254.7% revenue growth vs BMY's -0.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.9x vs 21.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 28.1% margin vs CGON's -39.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.48 vs CGON's 1.48 | |
| Dividends | 4.4% yield, 6-year raise streak, vs MRK's 2.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +209.7% vs IQV's +16.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.6% ROA vs CGON's -21.8%, ROIC 22.0% vs -23.8% |
CGON vs AZN vs MRK vs BMY vs IQV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CGON vs AZN vs MRK vs BMY vs IQV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MRK leads in 2 of 6 categories
CGON leads 1 • AZN leads 0 • BMY leads 0 • IQV leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK leads this category, winning 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK is the larger business by revenue, generating $64.9B annually — 16070.8x CGON's $4M. MRK is the more profitable business, keeping 28.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CGON's -39.9%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $4M | $60.4B | $64.9B | $48.5B | $16.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$189M | $20.1B | $32.4B | $15.7B | $3.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$161M | $10.4B | $18.3B | $7.3B | $1.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$132M | $9.1B | $12.4B | $11.9B | $2.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -15.0% | +81.7% | +74.2% | +68.7% | +26.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -47.2% | +23.7% | +41.1% | +25.7% | +13.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -39.9% | +17.2% | +28.1% | +15.0% | +8.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -32.8% | +15.1% | +19.0% | +24.6% | +16.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +4.1% | +12.5% | +4.5% | +2.6% | +8.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -6.1% | +5.3% | -19.6% | +9.2% | +15.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — BMY and IQV each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.4x trailing earnings, MRK trades at a 45% valuation discount to AZN's 27.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IQV offers better value at 0.56x vs AZN's 1.28x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.8B | $283.0B | $277.3B | $114.8B | $30.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5.8B | $306.9B | $313.3B | $151.8B | $44.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -33.26x | 27.91x | 15.42x | 16.30x | 22.79x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 17.74x | 21.93x | 8.93x | 14.06x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.28x | 0.73x | — | 0.56x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 15.76x | 10.68x | 9.17x | 12.97x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1445.85x | 4.82x | 4.27x | 2.38x | 1.86x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.11x | 5.85x | 5.35x | 6.20x | 4.67x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 24.05x | 22.44x | 8.94x | 14.78x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MRK leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BMY delivers a 39.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $39 in annual profit, vs $-23 for CGON. CGON carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to BMY's 2.55x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AZN scores 8/9 vs CGON's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -22.9% | +22.2% | +36.1% | +39.0% | +22.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -21.8% | +9.1% | +14.6% | +7.9% | +4.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -23.8% | +14.9% | +22.0% | +16.9% | +8.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -25.5% | +17.2% | +23.8% | +18.7% | +11.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 8 | 4 | 8 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.61x | 0.96x | 2.55x | 2.44x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$25M | $24.0B | $36.0B | $36.9B | $14.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $32M | $5.7B | $14.6B | $10.2B | $2.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $7M | $29.7B | $50.5B | $47.1B | $16.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 8.43x | 19.68x | 10.33x | 3.10x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CGON leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CGON five years ago would be worth $18,612 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $7,621 for IQV. Over the past 12 months, CGON leads with a +209.7% total return vs IQV's +16.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CGON at 23.0% vs BMY's -2.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +65.5% | +1.1% | +6.3% | +7.6% | -20.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +209.7% | +33.9% | +46.1% | +23.4% | +16.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +86.1% | +30.4% | +2.9% | -7.1% | -5.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +86.1% | +82.2% | +70.2% | +5.2% | -23.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +86.1% | +268.6% | +166.5% | +6.7% | +166.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +23.0% | +9.3% | +0.9% | -2.4% | -2.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CGON and MRK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MRK is the less volatile stock with a 0.48 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CGON's 1.48 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CGON currently trades 94.0% from its 52-week high vs IQV's 72.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.48x | 0.67x | 0.48x | 0.50x | 1.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $73.57 | $212.71 | $125.14 | $62.89 | $247.05 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $21.00 | $91.44 | $73.31 | $42.52 | $134.65 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.0% | +85.8% | +89.7% | +89.4% | +72.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 52.8 | 39.1 | 46.7 | 41.4 | 58.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.2M | 1.9M | 7.3M | 10.3M | 1.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — MRK and BMY each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CGON as "Buy", AZN as "Buy", MRK as "Buy", BMY as "Hold", IQV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 26.3% upside for IQV (target: $226) vs 10.2% for BMY (target: $62). For income investors, BMY offers the higher dividend yield at 4.39% vs AZN's 1.78%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $79.86 | $211.00 | $129.31 | $62.00 | $225.63 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 9 | 41 | 37 | 41 | 44 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.8% | +2.9% | +4.4% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 4 | 14 | 6 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.25 | $3.26 | $2.47 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.3% | +1.8% | 0.0% | +4.1% |
MRK leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CGON leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
CGON vs AZN vs MRK vs BMY vs IQV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CGON or AZN or MRK or BMY or IQV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, CG Oncology, Inc.
Common stock (CGON) is the stronger pick with 254. 7% 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 CG Oncology, Inc. Common stock (CGON) a "Buy" — based on 9 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 — CGON or AZN or MRK or BMY or IQV?
On trailing P/E, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the cheapest at 15. 4x versus AstraZeneca PLC at 27. 9x. 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: IQVIA Holdings Inc. wins at 0. 35x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 03x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CGON or AZN or MRK or BMY or IQV?
Over the past 5 years, CG Oncology, Inc.
Common stock (CGON) delivered a total return of +86. 1%, compared to -23. 8% for IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AZN returned +268. 6% versus BMY's +6. 7%. 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 — CGON or AZN or MRK or BMY or IQV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 48β versus CG Oncology, Inc. Common stock's 1. 48β — meaning CGON is approximately 212% more volatile than MRK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CG Oncology, Inc. Common stock (CGON) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 3% for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CGON or AZN or MRK or BMY or IQV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), CG Oncology, Inc.
Common stock (CGON) is pulling ahead at 254. 7% versus -0. 2% for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMY). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: AstraZeneca PLC grew EPS 190. 7% year-over-year, compared to -47. 5% for CG Oncology, Inc. Common stock. Over a 3-year CAGR, CGON leads at 176. 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 — CGON or AZN or MRK or BMY or IQV?
Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the more profitable company, earning 28. 1% net margin versus -39. 9% for CG Oncology, Inc. Common stock — 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 -47. 2% for CGON. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AZN leads at 81. 9%, 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 CGON or AZN or MRK or BMY or IQV 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, IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 03x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. 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 IQV: 26. 3% to $225. 63.
08Which pays a better dividend — CGON or AZN or MRK or BMY or IQV?
In this comparison, BMY (4.
4% yield), MRK (2. 9% yield), AZN (1. 8% yield) pay a dividend. CGON, IQV do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CGON or AZN or MRK or BMY or IQV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 48), 2. 9% yield, +166. 5% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MRK: +166. 5%, CGON: +86. 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 CGON and AZN and MRK and BMY 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.
In terms of investment character: CGON is a small-cap high-growth stock; AZN is a large-cap quality compounder stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock; BMY is a mid-cap deep-value stock; IQV is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. AZN, MRK, BMY pay a dividend while CGON, IQV 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.