Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
CYTK vs DBVT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
CYTK vs DBVT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $9.15B | $1712.35T |
| Revenue (TTM) | $106M | $0.00 |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-830M | $-168M |
| Gross Margin | 90.3% | — |
| Operating Margin | -6.1% | — |
| Total Debt | $1.28B | $22M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $882M | $194M |
CYTK vs DBVT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cytokinetics, Incor… (CYTK) | 100 | 358.7 | +258.7% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 41.2 | -58.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CYTK vs DBVT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CYTK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 0.66
- Rev growth 376.6%, EPS growth -24.3%, 3Y rev CAGR -2.4%
- 8.2% 10Y total return vs DBVT's -87.0%
DBVT is the clearest fit if your priority is quality.
- 0.3% margin vs CYTK's -7.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 376.6% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0% | |
| Quality / Margins | 0.3% margin vs CYTK's -7.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.66 vs DBVT's 1.26 | |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither stock pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +124.8% vs DBVT's +110.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -61.9% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0% |
CYTK vs DBVT — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CYTK vs DBVT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
DBVT leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CYTK and DBVT operate at a comparable scale, with $106M and $0 in trailing revenue.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $106M | $0 |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$633M | -$112M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$830M | -$168M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$549M | -$151M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +90.3% | — |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.1% | — |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -7.8% | — |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.2% | — |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.3% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -22.8% | +91.5% |
Valuation Metrics
CYTK leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $9.1B | $1712.35T |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $9.6B | $1712.35T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -11.36x | -0.76x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 103.93x | — |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 0.66x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — CYTK and DBVT each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), DBVT scores 4/9 vs CYTK's 3/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -130.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -61.9% | -89.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -3.1% | — |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -50.1% | -145.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.13x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $402M | -$172M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $882M | $194M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1.3B | $22M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -11.39x | -189.82x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CYTK leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CYTK five years ago would be worth $30,660 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,090 for DBVT. Over the past 12 months, CYTK leads with a +124.8% total return vs DBVT's +110.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CYTK at 24.6% vs DBVT's 6.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +20.3% | +4.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +124.8% | +110.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +93.4% | +19.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +206.6% | -69.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +817.2% | -87.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +24.6% | +6.2% |
Risk & Volatility
CYTK leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CYTK is the less volatile stock with a 0.66 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than DBVT's 1.26 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CYTK currently trades 92.6% from its 52-week high vs DBVT's 76.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.66x | 1.26x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $80.20 | $26.18 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $29.31 | $7.53 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +92.6% | +76.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 67.1 | 48.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.3M | 252K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates CYTK as "Buy" and DBVT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 131.8% upside for DBVT (target: $46) vs 24.5% for CYTK (target: $93).
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $92.50 | $46.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 34 | 15 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
CYTK leads in 3 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Total Returns). DBVT leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
CYTK vs DBVT: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CYTK or DBVT a better buy right now?
Analysts rate Cytokinetics, Incorporated (CYTK) a "Buy" — based on 34 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 — CYTK or DBVT?
Over the past 5 years, Cytokinetics, Incorporated (CYTK) delivered a total return of +206.
6%, compared to -69. 1% for DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CYTK returned +817. 2% versus DBVT's -87. 0%. 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 — CYTK or DBVT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cytokinetics, Incorporated (CYTK) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
66β versus DBV Technologies S. A. 's 1. 26β — meaning DBVT is approximately 89% more volatile than CYTK relative to the S&P 500.
04Which is growing faster — CYTK or DBVT?
On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cytokinetics, Incorporated grew EPS -24.
3% year-over-year, compared to -347. 5% for DBV Technologies S. A.. 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 — CYTK or DBVT?
DBV Technologies S.
A. (DBVT) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -891. 6% for Cytokinetics, Incorporated — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: DBVT leads at 0. 0% versus -695. 4% for CYTK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CYTK leads at 88. 5%, 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — CYTK or DBVT?
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.
07Is CYTK or DBVT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Cytokinetics, Incorporated (CYTK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
66), +817. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (CYTK: +817. 2%, DBVT: -87. 0%), 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.
08What are the main differences between CYTK and DBVT?
Both stocks operate in the null sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
In terms of investment character: CYTK is a small-cap high-growth stock; DBVT is a mega-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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.