Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CNTA vs ARQT vs INVA vs PFE vs MRK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
CNTA vs ARQT vs INVA vs PFE vs MRK — 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 | $6.15B | $3.05B | $1.68B | $149.09B | $294.04B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $416M | $424M | $63.31B | $64.93B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-251M | $-2M | $504M | $7.49B | $18.25B |
| Gross Margin | 100.0% | 90.9% | 76.2% | 69.3% | 74.2% |
| Operating Margin | -13.8% | 0.8% | 14.8% | 23.4% | 41.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 122.5x | 6.4x | 8.9x | 23.2x |
| Total Debt | $8M | $6M | $269M | $67.42B | $50.53B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $61M | $43M | $551M | $1.14B | $14.56B |
CNTA vs ARQT vs INVA vs PFE vs MRK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Centessa Pharmaceut… (CNTA) | 100 | 182.6 | +82.6% |
| Arcutis Biotherapeu… (ARQT) | 100 | 92.5 | -7.5% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 169.1 | +69.1% |
| Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | 100 | 67.7 | -32.3% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 164.5 | +64.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CNTA vs ARQT vs INVA vs PFE vs MRK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CNTA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +229.9% vs INVA's +6.3%
ARQT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 91.3%, EPS growth 88.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 367.3%
- 91.3% revenue growth vs CNTA's -100.0%
INVA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.06, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 14.64x
- PEG 0.62 vs MRK's 1.09
- Beta 0.06, current ratio 14.64x
- Lower P/E (6.4x vs 23.2x), PEG 0.62 vs 1.09
PFE is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.38, yield 6.6%
- 6.6% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs MRK's 2.7%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
MRK is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 169.6% 10Y total return vs INVA's 108.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 91.3% revenue growth vs CNTA's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (6.4x vs 23.2x), PEG 0.62 vs 1.09 | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs CNTA's -13.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.06 vs ARQT's 1.45 | |
| Dividends | 6.6% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs MRK's 2.7%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +229.9% vs INVA's +6.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.4% ROA vs CNTA's -44.2%, ROIC 14.2% vs -51.2% |
CNTA vs ARQT vs INVA vs PFE vs MRK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CNTA vs ARQT vs INVA vs PFE vs MRK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INVA leads in 3 of 6 categories
CNTA leads 1 • PFE leads 1 • ARQT leads 0 • MRK leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INVA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK and CNTA operate at a comparable scale, with $64.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CNTA's -13.2%. On growth, ARQT holds the edge at +60.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $416M | $424M | $63.3B | $64.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$257M | $6M | $86M | $21.0B | $32.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$251M | -$2M | $504M | $7.5B | $18.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$209M | $27M | $181M | $9.5B | $12.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +100.0% | +90.9% | +76.2% | +69.3% | +74.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -13.8% | +0.8% | +14.8% | +23.4% | +41.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -13.2% | -0.6% | +118.9% | +11.8% | +28.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -12.9% | +6.5% | +42.6% | +15.0% | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | +60.1% | +10.6% | +5.4% | +4.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -160.0% | +55.0% | +4.0% | -9.5% | -19.6% |
Valuation Metrics
INVA leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 64% valuation discount to PFE's 19.3x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), INVA offers better value at 0.67x vs MRK's 0.77x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $6.1B | $3.0B | $1.7B | $149.1B | $294.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6.1B | $3.0B | $1.4B | $215.4B | $330.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -27.21x | -187.54x | 6.89x | 19.27x | 16.35x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 122.45x | 6.36x | 8.85x | 23.17x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.67x | — | 0.77x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 6.85x | 10.59x | 11.25x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 409.72x | 8.11x | 3.95x | 2.38x | 4.53x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 10.23x | 16.37x | 1.64x | 1.72x | 5.67x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 8.57x | 16.43x | 23.79x |
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA delivers a 47.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $48 in annual profit, vs $-60 for CNTA. CNTA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MRK's 0.96x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PFE scores 7/9 vs MRK's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -60.4% | -1.4% | +47.6% | +8.3% | +36.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -44.2% | -0.6% | +32.4% | +3.6% | +14.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -51.2% | -5.2% | +14.2% | +7.5% | +22.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -35.7% | -4.3% | +12.4% | +9.0% | +23.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.03x | 0.23x | 0.78x | 0.96x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$54M | -$37M | -$282M | $66.3B | $36.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $61M | $43M | $551M | $1.1B | $14.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $8M | $6M | $269M | $67.4B | $50.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -23.48x | 2.08x | 63.45x | 4.02x | 19.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CNTA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in INVA five years ago would be worth $17,793 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,384 for ARQT. Over the past 12 months, CNTA leads with a +229.9% total return vs INVA's +6.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CNTA at 104.6% vs PFE's -7.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +67.7% | -15.9% | +14.4% | +7.5% | +12.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +229.9% | +80.6% | +6.3% | +12.4% | +49.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +756.0% | +138.8% | +69.7% | -21.6% | +17.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +58.9% | -16.2% | +77.9% | -13.0% | +77.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +82.6% | +11.8% | +108.1% | +25.8% | +169.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +104.6% | +33.7% | +19.3% | -7.8% | +5.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CNTA and INVA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INVA is the less volatile stock with a 0.06 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ARQT's 1.45 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CNTA currently trades 98.7% from its 52-week high vs ARQT's 76.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.24x | 1.45x | 0.06x | 0.38x | 0.32x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $40.25 | $31.77 | $25.15 | $28.75 | $125.14 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $11.77 | $12.72 | $16.52 | $23.11 | $76.66 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.7% | +76.7% | +90.4% | +91.2% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 63.1 | 66.4 | 50.6 | 53.2 | 58.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.7M | 1.5M | 660K | 28.5M | 7.2M |
Analyst Outlook
PFE leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CNTA as "Buy", ARQT as "Buy", INVA as "Buy", PFE as "Hold", MRK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 75.9% upside for INVA (target: $40) vs -0.6% for CNTA (target: $40). For income investors, PFE offers the higher dividend yield at 6.56% vs MRK's 2.74%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $39.50 | $34.00 | $40.00 | $26.75 | $131.58 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 12 | 10 | 39 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +6.6% | +2.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 2 | 15 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $1.72 | $3.26 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.3% | 0.0% | +1.7% |
INVA leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). CNTA leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
CNTA vs ARQT vs INVA vs PFE vs MRK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CNTA or ARQT or INVA or PFE or MRK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(ARQT) is the stronger pick with 91. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) offers the better valuation at 6. 9x trailing P/E (6. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Centessa Pharmaceuticals plc (CNTA) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — CNTA or ARQT or INVA or PFE or MRK?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus Pfizer Inc. at 19. 3x. On forward P/E, Innoviva, Inc. is actually cheaper at 6. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Innoviva, Inc. wins at 0. 62x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 09x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CNTA or ARQT or INVA or PFE or MRK?
Over the past 5 years, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) delivered a total return of +77. 9%, compared to -16. 2% for Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. (ARQT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MRK returned +169. 6% versus ARQT's +11. 8%. 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 — CNTA or ARQT or INVA or PFE or MRK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 06β versus Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. 's 1. 45β — meaning ARQT is approximately 2429% more volatile than INVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Centessa Pharmaceuticals plc (CNTA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 96% for Merck & Co. , Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CNTA or ARQT or INVA or PFE or MRK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(ARQT) is pulling ahead at 91. 3% versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to -3. 5% for Pfizer Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ARQT leads at 367. 3% 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 — CNTA or ARQT or INVA or PFE or MRK?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -1316. 9% for Centessa Pharmaceuticals plc — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INVA leads at 38. 5% versus -1384. 6% for CNTA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CNTA 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 CNTA or ARQT or INVA or PFE or MRK 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, Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 62x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 09x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) trades at 6. 4x forward P/E versus 122. 5x for Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. — 116. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for INVA: 75. 9% to $40. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CNTA or ARQT or INVA or PFE or MRK?
In this comparison, PFE (6.
6% yield), MRK (2. 7% yield) pay a dividend. CNTA, ARQT, INVA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CNTA or ARQT or INVA or PFE or MRK 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. 32), 2. 7% yield, +169. 6% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MRK: +169. 6%, ARQT: +11. 8%), 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 CNTA and ARQT and INVA and PFE and MRK?
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: CNTA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ARQT is a small-cap high-growth stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; PFE is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock. PFE, MRK pay a dividend while CNTA, ARQT, INVA 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.