Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CRDF vs TGTX vs KO vs JPM vs IMVT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Banks - Diversified
Biotechnology
CRDF vs TGTX vs KO vs JPM vs IMVT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Banks - Diversified | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $105M | $7.58B | $355.61B | $896.00B | $6.90B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $525K | $700M | $49.28B | $280.33B | $0.00 |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-45M | $462M | $13.70B | $57.05B | $-506M |
| Gross Margin | -21.5% | 83.0% | 61.7% | 60.0% | — |
| Operating Margin | -90.3% | 21.3% | 29.3% | 25.9% | — |
| Forward P/E | — | 35.9x | 25.3x | 14.4x | — |
| Total Debt | $832K | $261M | $45.49B | $942.38B | $72K |
| Cash & Equiv. | $17M | $79M | $10.27B | $343.34B | $902M |
CRDF vs TGTX vs KO vs JPM vs IMVT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cardiff Oncology, I… (CRDF) | 100 | 30.7 | -69.3% |
| TG Therapeutics, In… (TGTX) | 100 | 254.2 | +154.2% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 138.1 | +38.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CRDF vs TGTX vs KO vs JPM vs IMVT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, CRDF doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
TGTX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 87.3%, EPS growth 17.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.65, Low D/E 40.2%, current ratio 4.10x
- Beta 0.65, current ratio 4.10x
- 87.3% revenue growth vs IMVT's -22.2%
KO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 56 yrs, beta -0.20, yield 2.5%
- 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
JPM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs TGTX's 6.1%
- PEG 0.81 vs KO's 2.26
- Better valuation composite
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +110.9% vs CRDF's -59.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 87.3% revenue growth vs IMVT's -22.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 66.0% margin vs CRDF's -85.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.65 vs CRDF's 2.23 | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +110.9% vs CRDF's -59.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 42.8% ROA vs CRDF's -71.5%, ROIC 16.4% vs -118.9% |
CRDF vs TGTX vs KO vs JPM vs IMVT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CRDF vs TGTX vs KO vs JPM vs IMVT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
TGTX leads in 2 of 6 categories
KO leads 2 • JPM leads 1 • CRDF leads 0 • IMVT leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TGTX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $280.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. TGTX is the more profitable business, keeping 66.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRDF's -85.3%. On growth, TGTX holds the edge at +69.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $525,000 | $700M | $49.3B | $280.3B | $0 |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$46M | $150M | $15.5B | $81.4B | -$532M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$45M | $462M | $13.7B | $57.0B | -$506M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$37M | -$14M | $12.6B | $100.9B | -$407M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -21.5% | +83.0% | +61.7% | +60.0% | — |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -90.3% | +21.3% | +29.3% | +25.9% | — |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -85.3% | +66.0% | +27.8% | +20.4% | — |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -71.4% | -2.0% | +25.5% | +36.0% | — |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -62.4% | +69.6% | +12.1% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +35.7% | +2.9% | +18.2% | +16.0% | -14.1% |
Valuation Metrics
JPM leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.0x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 41% valuation discount to KO's 27.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs KO's 2.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $105M | $7.6B | $355.6B | $896.0B | $6.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $89M | $7.8B | $390.8B | $1.50T | $6.0B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.23x | 17.88x | 27.18x | 16.00x | -12.14x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 35.88x | 25.27x | 14.40x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.43x | 0.90x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 62.82x | 26.39x | 18.36x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 177.55x | 12.30x | 7.42x | 3.20x | — |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.27x | 12.33x | 10.40x | 2.47x | 7.19x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 67.15x | 8.88x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
TGTX leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
TGTX delivers a 87.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $87 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 JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs IMVT's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -95.5% | +87.4% | +41.1% | +15.9% | -68.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -71.5% | +42.8% | +13.1% | +1.3% | -62.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -118.9% | +16.4% | +15.8% | +4.5% | — |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -75.8% | +17.7% | +17.3% | +8.9% | -68.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.40x | 1.33x | 2.60x | 0.00x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$17M | $182M | $35.2B | $599.0B | -$902M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $17M | $79M | $10.3B | $343.3B | $902M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $832,000 | $261M | $45.5B | $942.4B | $72,000 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 5.67x | 10.70x | 0.74x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — TGTX and JPM and IMVT each lead in 2 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, IMVT leads with a +110.9% total return vs CRDF's -59.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs CRDF's -1.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -42.1% | +69.1% | +20.3% | -0.5% | +29.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -59.4% | +32.5% | +17.2% | +21.8% | +110.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -4.9% | +89.0% | +47.0% | +138.2% | +55.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -81.3% | +29.3% | +65.6% | +118.2% | +213.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.5% | +605.4% | +121.1% | +465.8% | +237.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.7% | +23.6% | +13.7% | +33.6% | +15.7% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 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. KO currently trades 98.3% 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 | 0.65x | -0.20x | 0.94x | 1.66x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.56 | $50.41 | $84.04 | $337.25 | $36.27 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.36 | $25.28 | $65.35 | $262.71 | $14.32 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +33.8% | +98.2% | +98.3% | +95.1% | +92.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.8 | 76.1 | 60.6 | 59.1 | 57.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 2.0M | 12.7M | 7.0M | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CRDF as "Buy", TGTX as "Buy", KO as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 29.9% upside for IMVT (target: $44) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, KO offers the higher dividend yield at 2.46% vs JPM's 1.86%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $2.00 | $54.50 | $86.13 | $339.75 | $43.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 13 | 48 | 61 | 23 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.5% | +1.9% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | 56 | 15 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.04 | $5.95 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.2% | +0.2% | +3.9% | 0.0% |
TGTX leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). KO leads in 2 (Risk & Volatility, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
CRDF vs TGTX vs KO vs JPM vs IMVT: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CRDF or TGTX or KO or JPM or IMVT a better buy right now?
For growth investors, TG Therapeutics, Inc.
(TGTX) is the stronger pick with 87. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 2% for Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (14. 4x 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 TGTX or KO or JPM or IMVT?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 2x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CRDF or TGTX or KO or JPM or IMVT?
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: TGTX returned +605. 4% 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 TGTX or KO or JPM or IMVT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Cardiff Oncology, Inc. 's 2. 23β — meaning CRDF is approximately -1214% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CRDF or TGTX or KO or JPM or IMVT?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), TG Therapeutics, Inc.
(TGTX) is pulling ahead at 87. 3% versus -13. 2% for Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: TG Therapeutics, Inc. grew EPS 1747% year-over-year, compared to -1. 5% for Immunovant, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, TGTX leads at 504. 9% 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 TGTX or KO or JPM or IMVT?
TG Therapeutics, Inc.
(TGTX) is the more profitable company, earning 72. 6% net margin versus -77. 3% for Cardiff Oncology, Inc. — meaning it keeps 72. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% 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 TGTX or KO or JPM or IMVT 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 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 35. 9x for TG Therapeutics, Inc. — 21. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IMVT: 29. 9% to $43. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — CRDF or TGTX or KO or JPM or IMVT?
In this comparison, KO (2.
5% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield) pay a dividend. CRDF, TGTX, IMVT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CRDF or TGTX or KO or JPM or IMVT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 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 (KO: +121. 1%, 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 TGTX and KO and JPM and IMVT?
These companies operate in different sectors (CRDF (Healthcare) and TGTX (Healthcare) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and JPM (Financial Services) and IMVT (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CRDF is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TGTX is a small-cap high-growth stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock. KO, JPM pay a dividend while CRDF, TGTX, IMVT 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.