Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CLNN vs DBVT vs AGEN vs MRK vs AZN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
CLNN vs DBVT vs AGEN vs MRK vs AZN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $74M | $1712.35T | $132M | $277.34B | $282.96B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $200K | $0.00 | $114M | $64.93B | $60.44B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-26M | $-168M | $115K | $18.25B | $10.39B |
| Gross Margin | 78.5% | — | 35.7% | 74.2% | 81.7% |
| Operating Margin | -115.4% | — | -17.7% | 41.1% | 23.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 1.8x | 21.9x | 17.7x |
| Total Debt | $22M | $22M | $10M | $50.53B | $29.70B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $194M | $3M | $14.56B | $5.71B |
CLNN vs DBVT vs AGEN vs MRK vs AZN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clene Inc. (CLNN) | 100 | 3.5 | -96.5% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 41.2 | -58.8% |
| Agenus Inc. (AGEN) | 100 | 5.0 | -95.0% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 145.9 | +45.9% |
| AstraZeneca PLC (AZN) | 100 | 170.2 | +70.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CLNN vs DBVT vs AGEN vs MRK vs AZN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CLNN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +189.8% vs AGEN's +27.1%
DBVT is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.26, Low D/E 12.8%, current ratio 3.67x
AGEN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth and value is your priority.
- 10.4% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0%
- Better valuation composite
MRK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.48, yield 2.9%
- Beta 0.48, yield 2.9%, current ratio 1.54x
- 28.1% margin vs CLNN's -130.9%
- Beta 0.48 vs AGEN's 2.72
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 MRK's 166.5%
- PEG 0.81 vs MRK's 1.03
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 10.4% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 28.1% margin vs CLNN's -130.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.48 vs AGEN's 2.72 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, 14-year raise streak, vs AZN's 1.8%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +189.8% vs AGEN's +27.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.6% ROA vs CLNN's -119.1% |
CLNN vs DBVT vs AGEN vs MRK vs AZN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CLNN vs DBVT vs AGEN vs MRK vs AZN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MRK leads in 4 of 6 categories
AZN leads 1 • CLNN leads 0 • DBVT leads 0 • AGEN leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK 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. MRK is the more profitable business, keeping 28.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CLNN's -130.9%. On growth, AGEN holds the edge at +27.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $200,000 | $0 | $114M | $64.9B | $60.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$22M | -$112M | -$10M | $32.4B | $20.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$26M | -$168M | $115,000 | $18.3B | $10.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$19M | -$151M | -$159M | $12.4B | $9.1B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +78.5% | — | +35.7% | +74.2% | +81.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -115.4% | — | -17.7% | +41.1% | +23.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -130.9% | — | +0.1% | +28.1% | +17.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -92.9% | — | -139.1% | +19.0% | +15.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -15.4% | — | +27.5% | +4.5% | +12.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +52.3% | +91.5% | +85.3% | -19.6% | +5.3% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — AGEN and MRK 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), MRK offers better value at 0.73x vs AZN's 1.28x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $74M | $1712.35T | $132M | $277.3B | $283.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $90M | $1712.35T | $140M | $313.3B | $306.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.79x | -0.76x | -1102.94x | 15.42x | 27.91x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 1.79x | 21.93x | 17.74x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.73x | 1.28x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 10.68x | 15.76x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 369.50x | — | 1.16x | 4.27x | 4.82x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 0.66x | — | 5.35x | 5.85x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 22.44x | 24.05x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MRK leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MRK delivers a 36.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $36 in annual profit, vs $-130 for DBVT. DBVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MRK's 0.96x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AZN scores 8/9 vs CLNN's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -130.2% | — | +36.1% | +22.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -119.1% | -89.0% | +0.1% | +14.6% | +9.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | — | — | +22.0% | +14.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -189.2% | -145.7% | — | +23.8% | +17.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 4 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.13x | — | 0.96x | 0.61x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $16M | -$172M | $7M | $36.0B | $24.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $194M | $3M | $14.6B | $5.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $22M | $22M | $10M | $50.5B | $29.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -8.61x | -189.82x | 1.11x | 19.68x | 8.43x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AZN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AZN five years ago would be worth $18,221 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $402 for CLNN. Over the past 12 months, CLNN leads with a +189.8% total return vs AGEN's +27.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors AZN at 9.3% vs AGEN's -51.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +28.1% | +4.9% | +16.1% | +6.3% | +1.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +189.8% | +110.4% | +27.1% | +46.1% | +33.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.5% | +19.7% | -88.2% | +2.9% | +30.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -96.0% | -69.1% | -93.9% | +70.2% | +82.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -96.2% | -87.0% | -94.3% | +166.5% | +268.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -26.6% | +6.2% | -51.0% | +0.9% | +9.3% |
Risk & Volatility
MRK leads this category, winning 2 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 AGEN's 2.72 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MRK currently trades 89.7% 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 | 1.97x | 1.26x | 2.72x | 0.48x | 0.67x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $13.50 | $26.18 | $7.34 | $125.14 | $212.71 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.28 | $7.53 | $2.71 | $73.31 | $91.44 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +54.7% | +76.3% | +51.1% | +89.7% | +85.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.3 | 48.1 | 48.8 | 46.7 | 39.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 558K | 252K | 814K | 7.3M | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
MRK leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: DBVT as "Buy", AGEN as "Buy", MRK as "Buy", AZN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 131.8% upside for DBVT (target: $46) vs 15.2% for MRK (target: $129). For income investors, MRK offers the higher dividend yield at 2.90% vs AZN's 1.78%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $46.33 | $7.33 | $129.31 | $211.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 15 | 11 | 37 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +2.9% | +1.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 1 | 14 | 4 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $3.26 | $3.25 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% | +1.8% | +0.3% |
MRK leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). AZN leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
CLNN vs DBVT vs AGEN vs MRK vs AZN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CLNN or DBVT or AGEN or MRK or AZN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Agenus Inc.
(AGEN) is the stronger pick with 10. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -41. 5% for Clene Inc. (CLNN). 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 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 — CLNN or DBVT or AGEN or MRK or AZN?
On trailing P/E, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the cheapest at 15. 4x versus AstraZeneca PLC at 27. 9x. On forward P/E, Agenus Inc. is actually cheaper at 1. 8x — 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: AstraZeneca PLC wins at 0. 81x 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 — CLNN or DBVT or AGEN or MRK or AZN?
Over the past 5 years, AstraZeneca PLC (AZN) delivered a total return of +82.
2%, compared to -96. 0% for Clene Inc. (CLNN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AZN returned +268. 6% versus CLNN's -96. 2%. 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 — CLNN or DBVT or AGEN or MRK or AZN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 48β versus Agenus Inc. 's 2. 72β — meaning AGEN is approximately 472% more volatile than MRK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 96% for Merck & Co. , Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CLNN or DBVT or AGEN or MRK or AZN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Agenus Inc.
(AGEN) is pulling ahead at 10. 4% versus -41. 5% for Clene Inc. (CLNN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: AstraZeneca PLC grew EPS 190. 7% year-over-year, compared to -347. 5% for DBV Technologies S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AZN leads at 9. 8% 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 — CLNN or DBVT or AGEN or MRK or AZN?
Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the more profitable company, earning 28. 1% net margin versus -130. 9% for Clene Inc. — 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 -115. 4% for CLNN. 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.
07Is CLNN or DBVT or AGEN or MRK or AZN 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, AstraZeneca PLC (AZN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x 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, Agenus Inc. (AGEN) trades at 1. 8x forward P/E versus 21. 9x for Merck & Co. , Inc. — 20. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DBVT: 131. 8% to $46. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — CLNN or DBVT or AGEN or MRK or AZN?
In this comparison, MRK (2.
9% yield), AZN (1. 8% yield) pay a dividend. CLNN, DBVT, AGEN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CLNN or DBVT or AGEN or MRK or AZN 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). 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 (MRK: +166. 5%, 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.
10What are the main differences between CLNN and DBVT and AGEN and MRK and AZN?
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: CLNN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; DBVT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; AGEN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock; AZN is a large-cap quality compounder stock. MRK, AZN pay a dividend while CLNN, DBVT, AGEN 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.