Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CRDF vs TGTX vs MGNX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
CRDF vs TGTX vs MGNX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $109M | $7.36B | $255M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $525K | $700M | $157M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-45M | $462M | $-70M |
| Gross Margin | -21.5% | 83.0% | 69.9% |
| Operating Margin | -90.3% | 21.3% | -40.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | 37.4x | — |
| Total Debt | $832K | $261M | $107M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $17M | $79M | $57M |
CRDF vs TGTX vs MGNX — 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 | 194.8 | +94.8% |
| MacroGenics, Inc. (MGNX) | 100 | 14.2 | -85.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CRDF vs TGTX vs MGNX
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.
TGTX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.74
- Rev growth 87.3%, EPS growth 17.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.0%
- 5.8% 10Y total return vs MGNX's -84.8%
MGNX is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +134.5% vs CRDF's -58.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 87.3% revenue growth vs CRDF's -13.2% | |
| Quality / Margins | 66.0% margin vs CRDF's -85.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.74 vs CRDF's 2.30 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 3 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +134.5% vs CRDF's -58.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 42.8% ROA vs CRDF's -71.5%, ROIC 16.4% vs -118.9% |
CRDF vs TGTX vs MGNX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CRDF vs TGTX vs MGNX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TGTX leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TGTX is the larger business by revenue, generating $700M annually — 1334.0x CRDF's $525,000. 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 | $157M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$46M | $150M | -$57M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$45M | $462M | -$70M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$37M | -$14M | -$72M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -21.5% | +83.0% | +69.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -90.3% | +21.3% | -40.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -85.3% | +66.0% | -44.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -71.4% | -2.0% | -45.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -62.4% | +69.6% | +57.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +35.7% | +2.9% | +10.8% |
Valuation Metrics
MGNX leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $109M | $7.4B | $255M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $92M | $7.5B | $304M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.30x | 17.35x | -3.40x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 37.39x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 61.00x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 183.32x | 11.94x | 1.70x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.34x | 11.97x | 4.56x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
TGTX leads this category, winning 6 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 $-148 for MGNX. CRDF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MGNX's 1.92x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), TGTX scores 4/9 vs MGNX's 2/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -95.5% | +87.4% | -147.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -71.5% | +42.8% | -28.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -118.9% | +16.4% | -144.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -75.8% | +17.7% | -34.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.40x | 1.92x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$17M | $182M | $50M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $17M | $79M | $57M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $832,000 | $261M | $107M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 5.67x | -4.78x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TGTX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TGTX five years ago would be worth $12,722 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,880 for MGNX. Over the past 12 months, MGNX leads with a +134.5% total return vs CRDF's -58.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TGTX at 22.4% vs MGNX's -11.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -40.2% | +64.1% | +149.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -58.9% | +25.4% | +134.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -1.9% | +83.4% | -30.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -79.8% | +27.2% | -81.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.5% | +584.5% | -84.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -0.6% | +22.4% | -11.5% |
Risk & Volatility
TGTX leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TGTX is the less volatile stock with a 0.74 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CRDF's 2.30 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TGTX currently trades 97.5% from its 52-week high vs CRDF's 34.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.23x | 0.74x | 1.59x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.56 | $49.30 | $4.64 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.36 | $25.28 | $1.19 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +34.9% | +97.5% | +86.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 42.1 | 73.8 | 49.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 1.9M | 1.0M |
Analyst Outlook
CRDF leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CRDF as "Buy", TGTX as "Buy", MGNX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 49.6% upside for MGNX (target: $6) vs 13.4% for TGTX (target: $55).
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $2.00 | $54.50 | $6.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 13 | 22 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.2% | 0.0% |
TGTX leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). MGNX leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
CRDF vs TGTX vs MGNX: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CRDF or TGTX or MGNX 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). TG Therapeutics, Inc. (TGTX) offers the better valuation at 17. 3x trailing P/E (37. 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 is the better long-term investment — CRDF or TGTX or MGNX?
Over the past 5 years, TG Therapeutics, Inc.
(TGTX) delivered a total return of +27. 2%, compared to -81. 2% for MacroGenics, Inc. (MGNX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TGTX returned +584. 5% 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.
03Which is safer — CRDF or TGTX or MGNX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), TG Therapeutics, Inc.
(TGTX) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 74β versus Cardiff Oncology, Inc. 's 2. 23β — meaning CRDF is approximately 203% more volatile than TGTX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 192% for MacroGenics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — CRDF or TGTX or MGNX?
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 -10. 3% for MacroGenics, 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.
05Which has better profit margins — CRDF or TGTX or MGNX?
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: TGTX leads at 20. 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.
06Is CRDF or TGTX or MGNX more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MGNX: 49.
6% to $6. 00.
07Which pays a better dividend — CRDF or TGTX or MGNX?
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.
08Is CRDF or TGTX or MGNX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, TG Therapeutics, Inc.
(TGTX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 74), +584. 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 (TGTX: +584. 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.
09What are the main differences between CRDF and TGTX and MGNX?
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: CRDF is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TGTX is a small-cap high-growth stock; MGNX is a small-cap quality compounder stock. 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.