Shell Companies
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
DMAA vs PFE vs MRK vs ABBV vs LLY
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
DMAA vs PFE vs MRK vs ABBV vs LLY — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Shell Companies | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $111M | $146.02B | $275.10B | $356.49B | $896.11B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $63.31B | $64.93B | $61.16B | $72.25B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $6M | $7.49B | $18.25B | $4.23B | $25.27B |
| Gross Margin | — | 69.3% | 74.2% | 70.2% | 83.5% |
| Operating Margin | — | 23.4% | 41.1% | 26.7% | 45.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 8.7x | 21.7x | 14.2x | 26.3x |
| Total Debt | $662.00 | $67.42B | $50.53B | $69.07B | $42.50B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1K | $1.14B | $14.56B | $5.23B | $7.16B |
DMAA vs PFE vs MRK vs ABBV vs LLY — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Feb 25 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Drugs Made In Ameri… (DMAA) | 100 | 106.3 | +6.3% |
| Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | 100 | 97.1 | -2.9% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 120.7 | +20.7% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 96.4 | -3.6% |
| Eli Lilly and Compa… (LLY) | 100 | 103.0 | +3.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: DMAA vs PFE vs MRK vs ABBV vs LLY
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, DMAA doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
PFE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.49, yield 6.7%
- Lower P/E (8.7x vs 14.2x)
- 6.7% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs LLY's 0.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend)
MRK ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.45, Low D/E 96.0%, current ratio 1.54x
- +47.7% vs DMAA's +5.0%
ABBV is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 0.28, yield 3.3%, current ratio 0.67x
- Beta 0.28 vs LLY's 0.65
LLY carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 44.7%, EPS growth 96.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 31.7%
- 12.0% 10Y total return vs ABBV's 293.8%
- PEG 0.91 vs MRK's 1.02
- 44.7% revenue growth vs PFE's -1.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 44.7% revenue growth vs PFE's -1.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.7x vs 14.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 35.0% margin vs ABBV's 6.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.28 vs LLY's 0.65 | |
| Dividends | 6.7% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs LLY's 0.6%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +47.7% vs DMAA's +5.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 22.7% ROA vs DMAA's 2.4% |
DMAA vs PFE vs MRK vs ABBV vs LLY — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
DMAA vs PFE vs MRK vs ABBV vs LLY — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LLY leads in 3 of 6 categories
PFE leads 2 • DMAA leads 1 • MRK leads 0 • ABBV leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LLY leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LLY and DMAA operate at a comparable scale, with $72.2B and $0 in trailing revenue. LLY is the more profitable business, keeping 35.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ABBV's 6.9%. On growth, LLY holds the edge at +55.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $63.3B | $64.9B | $61.2B | $72.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$726,546 | $21.0B | $32.4B | $24.5B | $34.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $6M | $7.5B | $18.3B | $4.2B | $25.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$414,132 | $9.5B | $12.4B | $18.7B | $13.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +69.3% | +74.2% | +70.2% | +83.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +23.4% | +41.1% | +26.7% | +45.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +11.8% | +28.1% | +6.9% | +35.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +15.0% | +19.0% | +30.6% | +18.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +5.4% | +4.5% | +10.0% | +55.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -9.5% | -19.6% | +57.4% | +169.9% |
Valuation Metrics
PFE leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.3x trailing earnings, MRK trades at a 82% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MRK offers better value at 0.72x vs LLY's 1.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $111M | $146.0B | $275.1B | $356.5B | $896.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $111M | $212.3B | $311.1B | $420.3B | $931.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -189.29x | 18.88x | 15.30x | 85.04x | 41.33x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 8.66x | 21.69x | 14.17x | 26.30x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.72x | — | 1.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 9999.00x | 10.44x | 10.61x | 14.89x | 29.80x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 2.33x | 4.24x | 5.83x | 13.75x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 1.68x | 5.30x | — | 32.10x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 16.09x | 22.26x | 20.01x | 99.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
LLY leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ABBV delivers a 62.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $62 in annual profit, vs $8 for PFE. PFE carries lower financial leverage with a 0.78x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to LLY's 1.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), LLY scores 8/9 vs DMAA's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +8.3% | +36.1% | +62.1% | +101.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.4% | +3.6% | +14.6% | +3.1% | +22.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +7.5% | +22.0% | +23.9% | +41.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | — | +9.0% | +23.8% | +21.5% | +46.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 8 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.78x | 0.96x | — | 1.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $661 | $66.3B | $36.0B | $63.8B | $35.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1,351 | $1.1B | $14.6B | $5.2B | $7.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $662 | $67.4B | $50.5B | $69.1B | $42.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 4.02x | 19.68x | 3.28x | 35.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LLY leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LLY five years ago would be worth $49,927 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,517 for PFE. Over the past 12 months, MRK leads with a +47.7% total return vs DMAA's +5.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LLY at 30.6% vs PFE's -6.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.1% | +5.4% | +5.4% | -10.6% | -12.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +5.0% | +21.1% | +47.7% | +12.2% | +27.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.4% | -19.4% | +2.1% | +49.7% | +123.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.4% | -14.8% | +69.5% | +99.6% | +399.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +6.4% | +28.5% | +164.7% | +293.8% | +1202.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.1% | -6.9% | +0.7% | +14.4% | +30.6% |
Risk & Volatility
DMAA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
DMAA is the less volatile stock with a 0.00 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LLY's 0.65 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. DMAA currently trades 100.0% from its 52-week high vs ABBV's 82.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.00x | 0.49x | 0.45x | 0.28x | 0.65x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.60 | $28.75 | $125.14 | $244.81 | $1133.95 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $10.09 | $21.97 | $73.31 | $176.57 | $623.78 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +100.0% | +89.3% | +89.0% | +82.3% | +83.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 71.1 | 43.9 | 43.7 | 43.9 | 58.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 166K | 33.3M | 7.2M | 5.8M | 2.6M |
Analyst Outlook
PFE leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PFE as "Hold", MRK as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", LLY as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 33.0% upside for LLY (target: $1261) vs 6.7% for PFE (target: $27). For income investors, PFE offers the higher dividend yield at 6.69% vs LLY's 0.63%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $27.40 | $129.31 | $256.69 | $1261.11 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 39 | 37 | 41 | 45 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +6.7% | +2.9% | +3.3% | +0.6% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 15 | 14 | 13 | 11 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.72 | $3.26 | $6.57 | $6.00 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +1.8% | +0.3% | +0.5% |
LLY leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). PFE leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook).
DMAA vs PFE vs MRK vs ABBV vs LLY: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is DMAA or PFE or MRK or ABBV or LLY a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Eli Lilly and Company (LLY) is the stronger pick with 44.
7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) offers the better valuation at 15. 3x trailing P/E (21. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) a "Buy" — based on 37 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 — DMAA or PFE or MRK or ABBV or LLY?
On trailing P/E, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the cheapest at 15. 3x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 0x. On forward P/E, Pfizer Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 7x — 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: Eli Lilly and Company wins at 0. 91x 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 — DMAA or PFE or MRK or ABBV or LLY?
Over the past 5 years, Eli Lilly and Company (LLY) delivered a total return of +399.
3%, compared to -14. 8% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LLY returned +1203% versus DMAA's +6. 4%. 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 — DMAA or PFE or MRK or ABBV or LLY?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Drugs Made In America Acquisition Corp.
Ordinary Shares (DMAA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 00β versus Eli Lilly and Company's 0. 65β — meaning LLY is approximately Infinity% more volatile than DMAA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Pfizer Inc. (PFE) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 78% versus 160% for Eli Lilly and Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — DMAA or PFE or MRK or ABBV or LLY?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Eli Lilly and Company (LLY) is pulling ahead at 44.
7% versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Eli Lilly and Company grew EPS 96. 0% year-over-year, compared to -3. 5% for Pfizer Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, LLY leads at 31. 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 — DMAA or PFE or MRK or ABBV or LLY?
Eli Lilly and Company (LLY) is the more profitable company, earning 31.
7% net margin versus 0. 0% for Drugs Made In America Acquisition Corp. Ordinary Shares — meaning it keeps 31. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: LLY leads at 45. 6% versus 0. 0% for DMAA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — LLY leads at 83. 8%, 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 DMAA or PFE or MRK or ABBV or LLY 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, Eli Lilly and Company (LLY) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 91x 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, Pfizer Inc. (PFE) trades at 8. 7x forward P/E versus 26. 3x for Eli Lilly and Company — 17. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LLY: 33. 0% to $1261. 11.
08Which pays a better dividend — DMAA or PFE or MRK or ABBV or LLY?
In this comparison, PFE (6.
7% yield), ABBV (3. 3% yield), MRK (2. 9% yield), LLY (0. 6% yield) pay a dividend. DMAA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is DMAA or PFE or MRK or ABBV or LLY better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Eli Lilly and Company (LLY) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
65), 0. 6% yield, +1203% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (LLY: +1203%, DMAA: +6. 4%), 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 DMAA and PFE and MRK and ABBV and LLY?
These companies operate in different sectors (DMAA (Financial Services) and PFE (Healthcare) and MRK (Healthcare) and ABBV (Healthcare) and LLY (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: DMAA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PFE is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock; ABBV is a large-cap income-oriented stock; LLY is a large-cap high-growth stock. PFE, MRK, ABBV, LLY pay a dividend while DMAA does 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.