Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CNTA vs MRK vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - General
Banks - Diversified
CNTA vs MRK vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $6.15B | $298.30B | $875.80B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $64.93B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-251M | $18.25B | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 100.0% | 74.2% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | -13.8% | 41.1% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 23.5x | 14.1x |
| Total Debt | $8M | $50.53B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $61M | $14.56B | $343.34B |
CNTA vs MRK vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Centessa Pharmaceut… (CNTA) | 100 | 182.9 | +82.9% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 166.9 | +66.9% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 190.9 | +90.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CNTA vs MRK vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CNTA is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +218.4% vs JPM's +19.1%
MRK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.34, yield 2.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.34, Low D/E 96.0%, current ratio 1.54x
- Beta 0.34, yield 2.7%, current ratio 1.54x
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 3.3%, EPS growth 1.5%
- 454.4% 10Y total return vs MRK's 172.8%
- PEG 1.08 vs MRK's 1.11
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 3.3% NII/revenue growth vs CNTA's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.1x vs 23.5x), PEG 1.08 vs 1.11 | |
| Quality / Margins | 28.1% margin vs CNTA's -13.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.34 vs CNTA's 1.26 | |
| Dividends | 2.7% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +218.4% vs JPM's +19.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.6% ROA vs CNTA's -44.2%, ROIC 22.0% vs -51.2% |
CNTA vs MRK vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CNTA vs MRK vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM and CNTA operate at a comparable scale, with $280.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. MRK is the more profitable business, keeping 28.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CNTA's -13.2%. On growth, MRK holds the edge at +4.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $64.9B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$257M | $32.4B | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$251M | $18.3B | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$209M | $12.4B | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +100.0% | +74.2% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -13.8% | +41.1% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -13.2% | +28.1% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -12.9% | +19.0% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | +4.5% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -160.0% | -19.6% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.6x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 6% valuation discount to MRK's 16.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MRK offers better value at 0.78x vs JPM's 1.20x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $6.2B | $298.3B | $875.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $6.1B | $334.3B | $1.47T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -27.24x | 16.59x | 15.64x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 23.50x | 14.08x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.78x | 1.20x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 11.40x | 18.11x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 410.24x | 4.59x | 3.13x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 10.24x | 5.75x | 2.42x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 24.13x | 8.68x |
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 $-60 for CNTA. CNTA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CNTA scores 5/9 vs MRK's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -60.4% | +36.1% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -44.2% | +14.6% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -51.2% | +22.0% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -35.7% | +23.8% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.96x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$54M | $36.0B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $61M | $14.6B | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $8M | $50.5B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -23.48x | 19.68x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CNTA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $20,999 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $17,802 for MRK. Over the past 12 months, CNTA leads with a +218.4% total return vs JPM's +19.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CNTA at 104.7% vs MRK's 5.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +67.9% | +14.3% | -2.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +218.4% | +54.5% | +19.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +757.1% | +18.6% | +133.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +83.2% | +78.0% | +110.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +82.9% | +172.8% | +454.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +104.7% | +5.8% | +32.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CNTA and MRK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MRK is the less volatile stock with a 0.34 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CNTA's 1.26 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CNTA currently trades 98.8% from its 52-week high vs JPM's 93.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.26x | 0.34x | 0.95x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $40.25 | $125.14 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $11.77 | $76.66 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +98.8% | +96.5% | +93.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.8 | 55.4 | 54.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.7M | 7.1M | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
MRK leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CNTA as "Buy", MRK as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 8.2% upside for MRK (target: $131) vs -0.7% for CNTA (target: $40). For income investors, MRK offers the higher dividend yield at 2.70% vs JPM's 1.90%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $39.50 | $130.69 | $338.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 37 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.7% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 15 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.26 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.7% | +3.9% |
MRK leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). JPM leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
CNTA vs MRK vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CNTA or MRK or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger pick with 3. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 2% for Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 15. 6x trailing P/E (14. 1x 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 MRK or JPM?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 15. 6x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. at 16. 6x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 1. 08x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 11x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CNTA or MRK or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +110. 0%, compared to +78. 0% for Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +454. 4% versus CNTA's +82. 9%. 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 MRK or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 34β versus Centessa Pharmaceuticals plc's 1. 26β — meaning CNTA is approximately 269% more volatile than MRK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Centessa Pharmaceuticals plc (CNTA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CNTA or MRK or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is pulling ahead at 3. 3% versus 1. 2% for Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Centessa Pharmaceuticals plc grew EPS 29. 1% year-over-year, compared to 1. 5% for JPMorgan Chase & Co.. 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 MRK or JPM?
Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the more profitable company, earning 28. 1% net margin versus -1316. 9% for Centessa Pharmaceuticals plc — 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 -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 MRK or JPM 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 08x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 11x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) trades at 14. 1x forward P/E versus 23. 5x for Merck & Co. , Inc. — 9. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MRK: 8. 2% to $130. 69.
08Which pays a better dividend — CNTA or MRK or JPM?
In this comparison, MRK (2.
7% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield) pay a dividend. CNTA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CNTA or MRK or JPM 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. 34), 2. 7% yield, +172. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MRK: +172. 8%, CNTA: +82. 9%), 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 MRK and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (CNTA (Healthcare) and MRK (Healthcare) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CNTA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. MRK, JPM pay a dividend while CNTA does 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.