Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CRDF vs IMVT vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
CRDF vs IMVT vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $105M | $6.90B | $7.70B | $9.03B | $30.79B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $525K | $0.00 | $0.00 | $4.03B | $16.63B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-45M | $-506M | $-327M | $-185M | $1.39B |
| Gross Margin | -21.5% | — | — | 31.9% | 26.1% |
| Operating Margin | -90.3% | — | — | 11.8% | 13.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 16.9x | 14.2x |
| Total Debt | $832K | $72K | $110K | $3.07B | $16.17B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $17M | $902M | $357M | $214M | $1.98B |
CRDF vs IMVT vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cardiff Oncology, I… (CRDF) | 100 | 9.7 | -90.3% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 77.1 | -22.9% |
| Praxis Precision Me… (PRAX) | 100 | 50.8 | -49.2% |
| Charles River Labor… (CRL) | 100 | 82.3 | -17.7% |
| IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) | 100 | 117.8 | +17.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CRDF vs IMVT vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CRDF plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 237.9% 10Y total return vs IQV's 177.5%
PRAX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.55, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 10.22x
- Beta 1.55, current ratio 10.22x
- +491.9% vs CRDF's -59.4%
Among these 5 stocks, CRL doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
IQV carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.16
- Rev growth 5.9%, EPS growth 4.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 4.2%
- 5.9% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0%
- Lower P/E (14.2x vs 16.9x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 5.9% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.2x vs 16.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.3% margin vs CRDF's -85.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.16 vs CRDF's 2.23 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +491.9% vs CRDF's -59.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 4.7% ROA vs CRDF's -71.5%, ROIC 8.7% vs -118.9% |
CRDF vs IMVT vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CRDF vs IMVT vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IQV leads in 4 of 6 categories
CRDF leads 0 • IMVT leads 0 • PRAX leads 0 • CRL leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IQV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IQV and PRAX operate at a comparable scale, with $16.6B and $0 in trailing revenue. IQV is the more profitable business, keeping 8.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRDF's -85.3%. On growth, IQV holds the edge at +8.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $525,000 | $0 | $0 | $4.0B | $16.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$46M | -$532M | -$357M | $824M | $3.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$45M | -$506M | -$327M | -$185M | $1.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$37M | -$407M | -$283M | $391M | $2.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -21.5% | — | — | +31.9% | +26.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -90.3% | — | — | +11.8% | +13.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -85.3% | — | — | -4.6% | +8.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -71.4% | — | — | +9.7% | +16.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -62.4% | — | — | +1.2% | +8.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +35.7% | -14.1% | +2.7% | -160.0% | +15.0% |
Valuation Metrics
IQV leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, CRL's 13.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than IQV's 13.1x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $105M | $6.9B | $7.7B | $9.0B | $30.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $89M | $6.0B | $7.3B | $11.9B | $45.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.23x | -12.14x | -19.77x | -64.44x | 23.15x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 16.90x | 14.16x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 0.57x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 13.04x | 13.11x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 177.55x | — | — | 2.25x | 1.89x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.27x | 7.19x | 6.83x | 2.89x | 4.75x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 17.42x | 15.01x |
Profitability & Efficiency
IQV leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IQV delivers a 22.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $22 in annual profit, vs $-96 for CRDF. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IQV's 2.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CRL scores 4/9 vs IMVT's 2/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -95.5% | -68.2% | -43.0% | -5.7% | +22.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -71.5% | -62.2% | -40.2% | -2.5% | +4.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -118.9% | — | -65.0% | +6.3% | +8.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -75.8% | -68.3% | -49.3% | +8.1% | +11.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.00x | 0.00x | 0.95x | 2.44x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$17M | -$902M | -$357M | $2.9B | $14.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $17M | $902M | $357M | $214M | $2.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $832,000 | $72,000 | $110,000 | $3.1B | $16.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | — | 4.29x | 3.10x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — IMVT and PRAX each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IMVT five years ago would be worth $31,304 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,867 for CRDF. Over the past 12 months, PRAX leads with a +491.9% total return vs CRDF's -59.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PRAX at 164.8% vs IQV's -5.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -42.1% | +29.8% | -6.9% | -7.4% | -19.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -59.4% | +110.9% | +491.9% | +23.5% | +14.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -4.9% | +55.0% | +1757.4% | -8.7% | -14.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -81.3% | +213.0% | -14.2% | -47.2% | -25.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.5% | +237.9% | -36.1% | +122.4% | +177.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.7% | +15.7% | +164.8% | -3.0% | -5.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — IMVT and IQV each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IQV is the less volatile stock with a 1.16 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CRDF's 2.23 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IMVT currently trades 92.7% from its 52-week high vs CRDF's 33.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.23x | 1.66x | 1.55x | 1.39x | 1.16x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.56 | $36.27 | $366.52 | $228.88 | $247.05 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.36 | $14.32 | $37.19 | $143.06 | $153.01 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +33.8% | +92.7% | +72.7% | +81.9% | +73.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.8 | 57.9 | 31.9 | 60.8 | 54.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 1.9M | 396K | 767K | 1.5M |
Analyst Outlook
IQV leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CRDF as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", PRAX as "Buy", CRL as "Buy", IQV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 127.8% upside for PRAX (target: $607) vs 13.7% for CRL (target: $213).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $2.00 | $43.67 | $607.15 | $213.17 | $222.22 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 23 | 16 | 37 | 44 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | 1 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.0% | +4.0% |
IQV leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Valuation Metrics. 2 categories are tied.
CRDF vs IMVT vs PRAX vs CRL vs IQV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CRDF or IMVT or PRAX or CRL or IQV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the stronger pick with 5. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) offers the better valuation at 23. 1x trailing P/E (14. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF) 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 — CRDF or IMVT or PRAX or CRL or IQV?
On forward P/E, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
is actually cheaper at 14. 2x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CRDF or IMVT or PRAX or CRL or IQV?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +213. 0%, compared to -81. 3% for Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +237. 9% versus CRDF's -99. 5%. 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 — CRDF or IMVT or PRAX or CRL or IQV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 16β versus Cardiff Oncology, Inc. 's 2. 23β — meaning CRDF is approximately 92% more volatile than IQV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 2% for IQVIA Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CRDF or IMVT or PRAX or CRL or IQV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is pulling ahead at 5. 9% versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cardiff Oncology, Inc. grew EPS 27. 4% year-over-year, compared to -1555. 0% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CRDF leads at 15. 4% 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 — CRDF or IMVT or PRAX or CRL or IQV?
IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 3% net margin versus -77. 3% for Cardiff Oncology, Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IQV leads at 14. 0% versus -82. 6% for CRDF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CRDF 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 CRDF or IMVT or PRAX or CRL or IQV more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) trades at 14. 2x forward P/E versus 16. 9x for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. — 2. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PRAX: 127. 8% to $607. 15.
08Which pays a better dividend — CRDF or IMVT or PRAX or CRL or IQV?
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.
09Is CRDF or IMVT or PRAX or CRL or IQV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 16), +177. 5% 10Y return). Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF) carries a higher beta of 2. 23 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (IQV: +177. 5%, CRDF: -99. 5%), 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 CRDF and IMVT and PRAX and CRL 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.
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.