Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
CYBN vs AXSM vs INVA vs ACAD vs INTR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Banks - Regional
CYBN vs AXSM vs INVA vs ACAD vs INTR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Banks - Regional |
| Market Cap | $304M | $11.33B | $1.93B | $3.86B | $2.95B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $708M | $424M | $1.10B | $14.62B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-123M | $-188M | $504M | $376M | $1.32B |
| Gross Margin | — | 92.6% | 76.2% | 91.5% | 42.4% |
| Operating Margin | — | -24.8% | 14.8% | 7.4% | 10.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 11.9x | 50.9x | 1.6x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $241M | $269M | $52M | $29.63B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $135M | $323M | $551M | $178M | $11.00B |
CYBN vs AXSM vs INVA vs ACAD vs INTR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 22 | Feb 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cybin Inc. (CYBN) | 100 | 28.6 | -71.4% |
| Axsome Therapeutics… (AXSM) | 100 | 481.1 | +381.1% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 135.5 | +35.5% |
| ACADIA Pharmaceutic… (ACAD) | 100 | 178.4 | +78.4% |
| Inter & Co, Inc. (INTR) | 100 | 444.3 | +344.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CYBN vs AXSM vs INVA vs ACAD vs INTR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CYBN lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
AXSM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 65.5%, EPS growth 38.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 133.7%
- 18.9% 10Y total return vs INTR's 98.9%
- 65.5% revenue growth vs CYBN's -57.3%
- +98.5% vs CYBN's -1.9%
INVA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.13
- Lower volatility, beta 0.13, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 14.64x
- Beta 0.13, current ratio 14.64x
- 118.9% margin vs AXSM's -26.6%
Among these 5 stocks, ACAD doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
INTR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.01 vs INVA's 1.15
- Lower P/E (1.6x vs 50.9x)
- 1.6% yield; 3-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 65.5% revenue growth vs CYBN's -57.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (1.6x vs 50.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs AXSM's -26.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.13 vs CYBN's 1.52 | |
| Dividends | 1.6% yield; 3-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +98.5% vs CYBN's -1.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.4% ROA vs CYBN's -58.3%, ROIC 14.2% vs -115.8% |
CYBN vs AXSM vs INVA vs ACAD vs INTR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
CYBN vs AXSM vs INVA vs ACAD vs INTR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INVA leads in 2 of 6 categories
INTR leads 2 • AXSM leads 1 • CYBN leads 0 • ACAD leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INTR and CYBN operate at a comparable scale, with $14.6B and $0 in trailing revenue. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to AXSM's -26.6%. On growth, AXSM holds the edge at +57.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $708M | $424M | $1.1B | $14.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$147M | -$167M | $86M | $96M | $1.9B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$123M | -$188M | $504M | $376M | $1.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$106M | -$71M | $181M | $212M | $3.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +92.6% | +76.2% | +91.5% | +42.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -24.8% | +14.8% | +7.4% | +10.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -26.6% | +118.9% | +34.3% | +8.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -10.0% | +42.8% | +19.4% | +20.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +57.4% | +10.6% | +9.7% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -8.2% | -3.3% | +4.0% | -81.8% | +39.7% |
Valuation Metrics
INTR leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 40% valuation discount to INTR's 11.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), INTR offers better value at 0.07x vs INVA's 0.67x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $304M | $11.3B | $1.9B | $3.9B | $2.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $205M | $11.2B | $1.7B | $3.7B | $6.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -13.66x | -59.81x | 6.91x | 9.85x | 11.44x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 11.91x | 50.91x | 1.60x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.67x | — | 0.07x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 8.10x | 26.91x | 17.25x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 17.74x | 4.55x | 3.61x | 1.00x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 6.52x | 124.01x | 1.65x | 3.15x | 1.41x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 9.88x | 36.74x | 4.87x |
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA delivers a 46.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $46 in annual profit, vs $-3 for AXSM. ACAD carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to INTR's 2.85x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ACAD scores 6/9 vs CYBN's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -81.0% | -2.6% | +46.5% | +35.6% | +13.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -58.3% | -27.8% | +32.4% | +26.2% | +1.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -115.8% | -19.1% | +14.2% | +10.0% | +3.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -54.1% | -52.1% | +12.4% | +10.1% | +3.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 2.73x | 0.23x | 0.04x | 2.85x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$135M | -$82M | -$282M | -$126M | $18.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $135M | $323M | $551M | $178M | $11.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $241M | $269M | $52M | $29.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -34.13x | 63.45x | — | 0.27x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
AXSM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AXSM five years ago would be worth $38,641 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $968 for CYBN. Over the past 12 months, AXSM leads with a +98.5% total return vs CYBN's -1.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors INTR at 54.4% vs CYBN's -20.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -26.4% | +23.2% | +14.7% | -13.7% | -19.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -1.9% | +98.5% | +21.7% | +52.4% | +0.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -49.8% | +183.2% | +95.2% | +4.7% | +268.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -90.3% | +286.4% | +94.4% | +7.1% | +98.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.7% | +1886.5% | +94.9% | -22.9% | +98.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -20.5% | +41.5% | +25.0% | +1.5% | +54.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — AXSM and INVA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INVA is the less volatile stock with a 0.13 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CYBN's 1.52 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. AXSM currently trades 94.2% from its 52-week high vs CYBN's 62.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.52x | 0.69x | 0.13x | 1.26x | 1.39x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.83 | $233.75 | $25.15 | $27.81 | $10.36 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.50 | $96.09 | $16.52 | $14.45 | $6.40 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +62.0% | +94.2% | +90.7% | +81.1% | +64.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 35.5 | 78.8 | 39.9 | 44.2 | 47.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 292K | 667K | 621K | 1.8M | 3.2M |
Analyst Outlook
INTR leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CYBN as "Buy", AXSM as "Buy", INVA as "Buy", ACAD as "Buy", INTR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 79.1% upside for INTR (target: $12) vs 2.6% for AXSM (target: $226). INTR is the only dividend payer here at 1.64% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $225.86 | $37.67 | $34.78 | $12.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 25 | 10 | 37 | 6 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +1.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 0 | — | 3 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $0.54 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
INVA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). INTR leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
CYBN vs AXSM vs INVA vs ACAD vs INTR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CYBN or AXSM or INVA or ACAD or INTR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
(AXSM) is the stronger pick with 65. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 11. 9% for ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. (ACAD). Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) offers the better valuation at 6. 9x trailing P/E (11. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Cybin Inc. (CYBN) a "Buy" — based on 4 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 — CYBN or AXSM or INVA or ACAD or INTR?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus Inter & Co, Inc. at 11. 4x. On forward P/E, Inter & Co, Inc. is actually cheaper at 1. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Inter & Co, Inc. wins at 0. 01x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 1. 15x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CYBN or AXSM or INVA or ACAD or INTR?
Over the past 5 years, Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
(AXSM) delivered a total return of +286. 4%, compared to -90. 3% for Cybin Inc. (CYBN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AXSM returned +1886% versus CYBN's -99. 7%. 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 — CYBN or AXSM or INVA or ACAD or INTR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 13β versus Cybin Inc. 's 1. 52β — meaning CYBN is approximately 1102% more volatile than INVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. (ACAD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 3% for Inter & Co, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CYBN or AXSM or INVA or ACAD or INTR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
(AXSM) is pulling ahead at 65. 5% versus 11. 9% for ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. (ACAD). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to 38. 6% for Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AXSM leads at 133. 7% 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 — CYBN or AXSM or INVA or ACAD or INTR?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -28. 7% for Axsome Therapeutics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INVA leads at 38. 5% versus -26. 5% for AXSM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AXSM leads at 92. 6%, 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 CYBN or AXSM or INVA or ACAD or INTR 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, Inter & Co, Inc. (INTR) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 01x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 1. 15x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Inter & Co, Inc. (INTR) trades at 1. 6x forward P/E versus 50. 9x for ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. — 49. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for INTR: 79. 1% to $12. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — CYBN or AXSM or INVA or ACAD or INTR?
In this comparison, INTR (1.
6% yield) pays a dividend. CYBN, AXSM, INVA, ACAD do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CYBN or AXSM or INVA or ACAD or INTR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Axsome Therapeutics, Inc.
(AXSM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 69), +1886% 10Y return). Cybin Inc. (CYBN) carries a higher beta of 1. 52 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (AXSM: +1886%, CYBN: -99. 7%), 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 CYBN and AXSM and INVA and ACAD and INTR?
These companies operate in different sectors (CYBN (Healthcare) and AXSM (Healthcare) and INVA (Healthcare) and ACAD (Healthcare) and INTR (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: CYBN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AXSM is a mid-cap high-growth stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; ACAD is a small-cap deep-value stock; INTR is a small-cap high-growth stock. INTR pays a dividend while CYBN, AXSM, INVA, ACAD 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.
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.