Medical - Devices
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
DCTH vs HALO vs INVA vs RCUS vs MRK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
DCTH vs HALO vs INVA vs RCUS vs MRK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Devices | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $399M | $7.55B | $1.69B | $2.55B | $275.10B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $65M | $1.40B | $424M | $236M | $64.93B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $561K | $317M | $504M | $-369M | $18.25B |
| Gross Margin | 118.8% | 81.9% | 76.2% | 90.7% | 74.2% |
| Operating Margin | -2.5% | 58.4% | 14.8% | -168.6% | 41.1% |
| Forward P/E | 169.8x | 8.0x | 7.3x | — | 21.7x |
| Total Debt | $936K | $0.00 | $269M | $99M | $50.53B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $43M | $134M | $551M | $222M | $14.56B |
DCTH vs HALO vs INVA vs RCUS vs MRK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Delcath Systems, In… (DCTH) | 100 | 147.0 | +47.0% |
| Halozyme Therapeuti… (HALO) | 100 | 264.2 | +164.2% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 163.9 | +63.9% |
| Arcus Biosciences, … (RCUS) | 100 | 80.9 | -19.1% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 144.7 | +44.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: DCTH vs HALO vs INVA vs RCUS vs MRK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
DCTH is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 129.1%, EPS growth 107.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 215.3%
- 129.1% revenue growth vs RCUS's -4.3%
HALO is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 5.6% 10Y total return vs MRK's 164.7%
- PEG 0.35 vs MRK's 1.02
INVA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.11, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 14.64x
- Beta 0.11, current ratio 14.64x
- Lower P/E (7.3x vs 21.7x), PEG 0.71 vs 1.02
- 118.9% margin vs RCUS's -156.4%
RCUS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +197.3% vs DCTH's -20.1%
MRK is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.45, yield 2.9%
- 2.9% yield; 14-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 129.1% revenue growth vs RCUS's -4.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.3x vs 21.7x), PEG 0.71 vs 1.02 | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs RCUS's -156.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.11 vs RCUS's 1.84 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield; 14-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +197.3% vs DCTH's -20.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.4% ROA vs RCUS's -35.3%, ROIC 14.2% vs -64.1% |
DCTH vs HALO vs INVA vs RCUS vs MRK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
DCTH vs HALO vs INVA vs RCUS vs MRK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HALO leads in 3 of 6 categories
INVA leads 2 • MRK leads 1 • DCTH leads 0 • RCUS leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HALO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK is the larger business by revenue, generating $64.9B annually — 992.0x DCTH's $65M. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RCUS's -156.4%. On growth, HALO holds the edge at +51.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $65M | $1.4B | $424M | $236M | $64.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$1M | $945M | $86M | -$391M | $32.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $561,000 | $317M | $504M | -$369M | $18.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $19M | $645M | $181M | -$489M | $12.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +118.8% | +81.9% | +76.2% | +90.7% | +74.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.5% | +58.4% | +14.8% | -168.6% | +41.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.9% | +22.7% | +118.9% | -156.4% | +28.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +29.3% | +46.2% | +42.6% | -2.1% | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | +51.6% | +10.6% | -39.3% | +4.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.1% | -2.1% | +4.0% | +10.5% | -19.6% |
Valuation Metrics
INVA leads this category, winning 6 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 96% valuation discount to DCTH's 169.8x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), INVA offers better value at 0.67x vs HALO's 1.09x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $399M | $7.6B | $1.7B | $2.6B | $275.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $356M | $7.4B | $1.4B | $2.4B | $311.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 169.82x | 25.05x | 6.94x | -7.71x | 15.30x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 7.96x | 7.31x | — | 21.69x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.09x | 0.67x | — | 0.72x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 353.19x | 8.20x | 6.90x | — | 10.61x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.68x | 5.41x | 3.97x | 10.34x | 4.24x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.12x | 162.76x | 1.65x | 4.32x | 5.30x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 19.02x | 11.72x | 8.63x | — | 22.26x |
Profitability & Efficiency
HALO leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HALO delivers a 6.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-69 for RCUS. DCTH carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MRK's 0.96x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), DCTH scores 7/9 vs RCUS's 0/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +0.5% | +6.5% | +47.6% | -69.0% | +36.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.5% | +12.5% | +32.4% | -35.3% | +14.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +0.9% | +73.4% | +14.2% | -64.1% | +22.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +0.7% | +38.2% | +12.4% | -42.1% | +23.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | — | 0.23x | 0.16x | 0.96x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$43M | -$134M | -$282M | -$123M | $36.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $43M | $134M | $551M | $222M | $14.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $936,000 | $0 | $269M | $99M | $50.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 46.08x | 63.45x | -13.38x | 19.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HALO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in INVA five years ago would be worth $19,448 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,787 for RCUS. Over the past 12 months, RCUS leads with a +197.3% total return vs DCTH's -20.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HALO at 28.4% vs MRK's 0.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +15.4% | -8.8% | +15.2% | +8.9% | +5.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -20.1% | -5.3% | +23.2% | +197.3% | +47.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +88.2% | +111.8% | +96.0% | +27.8% | +2.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +11.9% | +39.1% | +94.5% | -12.1% | +69.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.8% | +559.7% | +95.6% | +49.2% | +164.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +23.5% | +28.4% | +25.1% | +8.5% | +0.7% |
Risk & Volatility
INVA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INVA is the less volatile stock with a 0.11 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RCUS's 1.84 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. INVA currently trades 91.0% from its 52-week high vs DCTH's 63.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.65x | 0.51x | 0.11x | 1.84x | 0.45x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $18.23 | $82.22 | $25.15 | $28.72 | $125.14 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $8.12 | $47.50 | $16.52 | $7.72 | $73.31 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +63.0% | +78.0% | +91.0% | +88.3% | +89.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.2 | 47.7 | 44.7 | 52.9 | 43.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 354K | 1.4M | 604K | 1.2M | 7.2M |
Analyst Outlook
MRK leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: DCTH as "Buy", HALO as "Buy", INVA as "Buy", RCUS as "Buy", MRK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 100.3% upside for DCTH (target: $23) vs 16.1% for MRK (target: $129). MRK is the only dividend payer here at 2.93% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $23.00 | $75.60 | $40.00 | $30.00 | $129.31 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 11 | 27 | 10 | 18 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +2.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | — | 0 | — | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $3.26 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.5% | +4.5% | +0.3% | 0.0% | +1.8% |
HALO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). INVA leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Risk & Volatility).
DCTH vs HALO vs INVA vs RCUS vs MRK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is DCTH or HALO or INVA or RCUS or MRK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Delcath Systems, Inc.
(DCTH) is the stronger pick with 129. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 3% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS). Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) offers the better valuation at 6. 9x trailing P/E (7. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Delcath Systems, Inc. (DCTH) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — DCTH or HALO or INVA or RCUS or MRK?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus Delcath Systems, Inc. at 169. 8x. On forward P/E, Innoviva, Inc. is actually cheaper at 7. 3x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. wins at 0. 35x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 02x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — DCTH or HALO or INVA or RCUS or MRK?
Over the past 5 years, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) delivered a total return of +94. 5%, compared to -12. 1% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HALO returned +559. 7% versus DCTH's -98. 8%. 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 — DCTH or HALO or INVA or RCUS or MRK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 11β versus Arcus Biosciences, Inc. 's 1. 84β — meaning RCUS is approximately 1515% more volatile than INVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Delcath Systems, Inc. (DCTH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 96% for Merck & Co. , Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — DCTH or HALO or INVA or RCUS or MRK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Delcath Systems, Inc.
(DCTH) is pulling ahead at 129. 1% versus -4. 3% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to -25. 4% for Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, DCTH leads at 215. 3% 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 — DCTH or HALO or INVA or RCUS or MRK?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -142. 9% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HALO leads at 58. 4% versus -156. 3% for RCUS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RCUS leads at 96. 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 DCTH or HALO or INVA or RCUS or MRK 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, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 02x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) trades at 7. 3x forward P/E versus 21. 7x for Merck & Co. , Inc. — 14. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DCTH: 100. 3% to $23. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — DCTH or HALO or INVA or RCUS or MRK?
In this comparison, MRK (2.
9% yield) pays a dividend. DCTH, HALO, INVA, RCUS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is DCTH or HALO or INVA or RCUS or MRK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 45), 2. 9% yield, +164. 7% 10Y return). Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) carries a higher beta of 1. 84 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (MRK: +164. 7%, RCUS: +49. 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.
10What are the main differences between DCTH and HALO and INVA and RCUS and MRK?
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: DCTH is a small-cap high-growth stock; HALO is a small-cap high-growth stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; RCUS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock. MRK pays a dividend while DCTH, HALO, INVA, RCUS 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.