Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
CSBR vs NTRA vs EXAS vs FATE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Biotechnology
CSBR vs NTRA vs EXAS vs FATE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $84M | $27.53B | $20.02B | $276M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $41M | $2.50B | $3.25B | $7M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-2M | $-226M | $-208M | $-136M |
| Gross Margin | 21.5% | 65.2% | 69.7% | — |
| Operating Margin | -5.6% | -13.0% | -6.4% | -22.2% |
| Forward P/E | 18.2x | — | 582.8x | — |
| Total Debt | $6M | $214M | $2.52B | $78M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $10M | $1.08B | $956M | $47M |
CSBR vs NTRA vs EXAS vs FATE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Champions Oncology,… (CSBR) | 100 | 62.5 | -37.5% |
| Natera, Inc. (NTRA) | 100 | 443.0 | +343.0% |
| Exact Sciences Corp… (EXAS) | 100 | 120.4 | +20.4% |
| Fate Therapeutics, … (FATE) | 100 | 7.4 | -92.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CSBR vs NTRA vs EXAS vs FATE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CSBR has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in value and quality.
- Better valuation composite
- -5.4% margin vs FATE's -20.5%
NTRA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 35.9%, EPS growth 0.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 41.1%
- 18.3% 10Y total return vs EXAS's 16.7%
- 35.9% revenue growth vs FATE's -51.2%
EXAS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- beta 0.05
- Lower volatility, beta 0.05, current ratio 2.43x
- Beta 0.05, current ratio 2.43x
- Beta 0.05 vs FATE's 1.99
FATE is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +132.0% vs CSBR's +1.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 35.9% revenue growth vs FATE's -51.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | -5.4% margin vs FATE's -20.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.05 vs FATE's 1.99 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +132.0% vs CSBR's +1.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -3.5% ROA vs FATE's -42.7%, ROIC -3.6% vs -36.5% |
CSBR vs NTRA vs EXAS vs FATE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CSBR vs NTRA vs EXAS vs FATE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
EXAS leads in 2 of 6 categories
CSBR leads 2 • NTRA leads 1 • FATE leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EXAS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
EXAS is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.2B annually — 488.6x FATE's $7M. CSBR is the more profitable business, keeping -5.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FATE's -20.5%. On growth, NTRA holds the edge at +38.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $41M | $2.5B | $3.2B | $7M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$1M | -$333M | -$41M | -$148M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$2M | -$226M | -$208M | -$136M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $4M | $74M | $357M | -$88M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +21.5% | +65.2% | +69.7% | — |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -5.6% | -13.0% | -6.4% | -22.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -5.4% | -9.0% | -6.4% | -20.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +9.2% | +3.0% | +11.0% | -13.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | +38.8% | +23.1% | -26.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -106.5% | -20.0% | +90.4% | +38.6% |
Valuation Metrics
CSBR leads this category, winning 2 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $84M | $27.5B | $20.0B | $276M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $81M | $26.7B | $21.6B | $307M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 18.24x | -127.79x | -95.37x | -2.08x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 582.83x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 12.43x | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.48x | 11.94x | 6.16x | 41.49x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 22.77x | 15.51x | 8.24x | 1.37x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 12.05x | 252.31x | 56.10x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CSBR leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
EXAS delivers a -8.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-9 in annual profit, vs $-66 for FATE. NTRA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.13x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CSBR's 1.62x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), CSBR scores 7/9 vs FATE's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -56.5% | -15.1% | -8.7% | -65.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -7.4% | -10.4% | -3.5% | -42.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +2.4% | -36.1% | -3.6% | -36.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +74.1% | -18.3% | -4.0% | -43.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 7 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.62x | 0.13x | 1.05x | 0.38x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$4M | -$862M | $1.6B | $31M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $10M | $1.1B | $956M | $47M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $6M | $214M | $2.5B | $78M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 179.48x | -34.29x | -5.47x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NTRA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NTRA five years ago would be worth $21,442 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $316 for FATE. Over the past 12 months, FATE leads with a +132.0% total return vs CSBR's +1.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NTRA at 54.1% vs FATE's -24.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -9.6% | -15.1% | +3.1% | +141.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +1.7% | +19.5% | +97.7% | +132.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +30.0% | +265.8% | +53.0% | -56.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -40.5% | +114.4% | +6.1% | -96.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +48.6% | +1834.7% | +1669.1% | +38.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +9.1% | +54.1% | +15.2% | -24.0% |
Risk & Volatility
EXAS leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
EXAS is the less volatile stock with a 0.05 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FATE's 1.99 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. EXAS currently trades 99.9% from its 52-week high vs CSBR's 62.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.54x | 1.17x | 0.05x | 1.99x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.63 | $256.36 | $104.98 | $2.46 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.50 | $131.81 | $38.81 | $0.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +62.5% | +75.8% | +99.9% | +97.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 50.5 | 59.8 | 76.4 | 82.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 8K | 1.4M | 4.3M | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NTRA as "Buy", EXAS as "Buy", FATE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 1552.7% upside for FATE (target: $40) vs 0.1% for EXAS (target: $105).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $265.63 | $105.00 | $39.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 27 | 41 | 31 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% | 0.0% |
EXAS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Risk & Volatility). CSBR leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency).
CSBR vs NTRA vs EXAS vs FATE: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CSBR or NTRA or EXAS or FATE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is the stronger pick with 35. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -51. 2% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Champions Oncology, Inc. (CSBR) offers the better valuation at 18. 2x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Natera, Inc. (NTRA) a "Buy" — based on 27 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 — CSBR or NTRA or EXAS or FATE?
Over the past 5 years, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) delivered a total return of +114. 4%, compared to -96. 8% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NTRA returned +1835% versus FATE's +38. 2%. 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 — CSBR or NTRA or EXAS or FATE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Exact Sciences Corporation (EXAS) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
05β versus Fate Therapeutics, Inc. 's 1. 99β — meaning FATE is approximately 3681% more volatile than EXAS relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Natera, Inc. (NTRA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 13% versus 162% for Champions Oncology, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — CSBR or NTRA or EXAS or FATE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is pulling ahead at 35. 9% versus -51. 2% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Champions Oncology, Inc. grew EPS 161. 1% year-over-year, compared to 0. 7% for Natera, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NTRA leads at 41. 1% 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 — CSBR or NTRA or EXAS or FATE?
Champions Oncology, Inc.
(CSBR) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 3% net margin versus -20. 5% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CSBR leads at 8. 5% versus -22. 2% for FATE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — EXAS leads at 69. 7%, 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 CSBR or NTRA or EXAS or FATE more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FATE: 1552.
7% to $39. 50.
07Which pays a better dividend — CSBR or NTRA or EXAS or FATE?
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 CSBR or NTRA or EXAS or FATE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Exact Sciences Corporation (EXAS) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
05), +1669% 10Y return). Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE) carries a higher beta of 1. 99 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (EXAS: +1669%, FATE: +38. 2%), 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 CSBR and NTRA and EXAS and FATE?
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: CSBR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NTRA is a mid-cap high-growth stock; EXAS is a mid-cap high-growth stock; FATE 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.