Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
EDSA vs ADMA vs NUVB vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Banks - Diversified
EDSA vs ADMA vs NUVB vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $50M | $1.93B | $1.65B | $875.80B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $510M | $143M | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-10M | $165M | $-146M | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | — | 61.3% | 91.6% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | — | 42.1% | -105.0% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 9.9x | — | 14.1x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $80M | $10M | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $11M | $88M | $164M | $343.34B |
EDSA vs ADMA vs NUVB vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Aug 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Edesa Biotech, Inc. (EDSA) | 100 | 8.9 | -91.1% |
| ADMA Biologics, Inc. (ADMA) | 100 | 322.0 | +222.0% |
| Nuvation Bio Inc. (NUVB) | 100 | 49.2 | -50.8% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 320.1 | +220.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EDSA vs ADMA vs NUVB vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EDSA is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +203.8% vs ADMA's -62.0%
ADMA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and quality.
- Better valuation composite
- 32.4% margin vs NUVB's -102.1%
- 27.4% ROA vs EDSA's -75.2%, ROIC 36.0% vs -452.3%
NUVB is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 7.0%, EPS growth 71.6%
- 7.0% revenue growth vs EDSA's -82.2%
JPM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.95, yield 1.9%
- 454.4% 10Y total return vs ADMA's 16.9%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.95, current ratio 0.52x
- Beta 0.95, yield 1.9%, current ratio 0.52x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 7.0% revenue growth vs EDSA's -82.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 32.4% margin vs NUVB's -102.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.95 vs NUVB's 2.16 | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +203.8% vs ADMA's -62.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 27.4% ROA vs EDSA's -75.2%, ROIC 36.0% vs -452.3% |
EDSA vs ADMA vs NUVB vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
EDSA vs ADMA vs NUVB vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories
NUVB leads 1 • ADMA leads 1 • EDSA leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NUVB leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM and EDSA operate at a comparable scale, with $280.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. ADMA is the more profitable business, keeping 32.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NUVB's -102.1%. On growth, NUVB holds the edge at +26.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $510M | $143M | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$11M | $221M | -$145M | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$10M | $165M | -$146M | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$8M | $108M | -$126M | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +61.3% | +91.6% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +42.1% | -105.0% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +32.4% | -102.1% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +21.2% | -88.1% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -0.3% | +26.0% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -66.7% | +72.7% | +106.3% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
JPM leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.9x trailing earnings, ADMA trades at a 11% valuation discount to JPM's 15.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, ADMA's 9.6x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than JPM's 18.1x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $50M | $1.9B | $1.7B | $875.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $39M | $1.9B | $1.5B | $1.47T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -4.45x | 13.87x | -7.93x | 15.64x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 9.92x | — | 14.08x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 1.20x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 9.63x | — | 18.11x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 3.78x | 26.27x | 3.13x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.58x | 4.27x | 5.32x | 2.42x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 69.31x | — | 8.68x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ADMA leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ADMA delivers a 39.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $39 in annual profit, vs $-82 for EDSA. NUVB carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ADMA scores 5/9 vs EDSA's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -82.3% | +39.0% | -44.1% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -75.2% | +27.4% | -23.8% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -4.5% | +36.0% | -54.3% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -109.6% | +38.8% | -42.8% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.17x | 0.03x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$11M | -$8M | -$154M | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $11M | $88M | $164M | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $80M | $10M | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 50.85x | -162.11x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — EDSA and NUVB each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ADMA five years ago would be worth $45,714 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,382 for EDSA. Over the past 12 months, EDSA leads with a +203.8% total return vs ADMA's -62.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NUVB at 39.9% vs EDSA's -1.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +276.7% | -53.5% | -44.5% | -2.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +203.8% | -62.0% | +116.4% | +19.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -3.9% | +115.0% | +173.6% | +133.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.2% | +357.1% | -59.2% | +110.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.3% | +16.9% | -52.4% | +454.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.3% | +29.1% | +39.9% | +32.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — EDSA and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
EDSA is the less volatile stock with a -0.29 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NUVB's 2.16 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JPM currently trades 93.0% from its 52-week high vs EDSA's 27.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.18x | 1.11x | 2.23x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $20.32 | $22.37 | $9.75 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.72 | $7.21 | $1.57 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +27.8% | +37.2% | +48.8% | +93.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 34.3 | 47.7 | 45.9 | 54.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 617K | 5.0M | 3.9M | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
JPM leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EDSA as "Buy", ADMA as "Buy", NUVB as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 173.1% upside for NUVB (target: $13) vs 8.1% for JPM (target: $339). JPM is the only dividend payer here at 1.90% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $21.00 | $13.00 | $338.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 10 | 9 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | — | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.7% | 0.0% | +3.9% |
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). NUVB leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
EDSA vs ADMA vs NUVB vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EDSA or ADMA or NUVB or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Nuvation Bio Inc.
(NUVB) is the stronger pick with 699. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM). ADMA Biologics, Inc. (ADMA) offers the better valuation at 13. 9x trailing P/E (9. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Edesa Biotech, Inc. (EDSA) a "Buy" — based on 2 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 — EDSA or ADMA or NUVB or JPM?
On trailing P/E, ADMA Biologics, Inc.
(ADMA) is the cheapest at 13. 9x versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. at 15. 6x. On forward P/E, ADMA Biologics, Inc. is actually cheaper at 9. 9x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EDSA or ADMA or NUVB or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, ADMA Biologics, Inc.
(ADMA) delivered a total return of +357. 1%, compared to -86. 2% for Edesa Biotech, Inc. (EDSA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus EDSA's -99. 3%. 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 — EDSA or ADMA or NUVB or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Edesa Biotech, Inc.
(EDSA) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 18β versus Nuvation Bio Inc. 's 2. 23β — meaning NUVB is approximately -1347% more volatile than EDSA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Nuvation Bio Inc. (NUVB) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EDSA or ADMA or NUVB or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Nuvation Bio Inc.
(NUVB) is pulling ahead at 699. 0% versus 3. 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Nuvation Bio Inc. grew EPS 71. 6% year-over-year, compared to -25. 9% for ADMA Biologics, Inc.. 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 — EDSA or ADMA or NUVB or JPM?
ADMA Biologics, Inc.
(ADMA) is the more profitable company, earning 28. 8% net margin versus -325. 3% for Nuvation Bio Inc. — meaning it keeps 28. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ADMA leads at 37. 5% versus -338. 7% for NUVB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NUVB leads at 86. 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 EDSA or ADMA or NUVB or JPM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, ADMA Biologics, Inc.
(ADMA) trades at 9. 9x forward P/E versus 14. 1x for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — 4. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NUVB: 173. 1% to $13. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — EDSA or ADMA or NUVB or JPM?
In this comparison, JPM (1.
9% yield) pays a dividend. EDSA, ADMA, NUVB do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is EDSA or ADMA or NUVB or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Edesa Biotech, Inc.
(EDSA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 18)). Nuvation Bio Inc. (NUVB) carries a higher beta of 2. 23 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (EDSA: -99. 3%, NUVB: -50. 8%), 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 EDSA and ADMA and NUVB and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (EDSA (Healthcare) and ADMA (Healthcare) and NUVB (Healthcare) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: EDSA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ADMA is a small-cap high-growth stock; NUVB is a small-cap high-growth stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. JPM pays a dividend while EDSA, ADMA, NUVB 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.