Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
EDSA vs MRK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - General
EDSA vs MRK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $50M | $298.30B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $64.93B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-10M | $18.25B |
| Gross Margin | — | 74.2% |
| Operating Margin | — | 41.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 23.5x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $50.53B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $11M | $14.56B |
EDSA vs MRK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Edesa Biotech, Inc. (EDSA) | 100 | 16.4 | -83.6% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 163.8 | +63.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EDSA vs MRK
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 growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- EPS growth 34.2%
- Lower volatility, beta -0.29, current ratio 10.67x
- Beta -0.29, current ratio 10.67x
MRK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 172.8% 10Y total return vs EDSA's -99.3%
- 1.2% revenue growth vs EDSA's -82.2%
- 28.1% margin vs EDSA's 0.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 1.2% revenue growth vs EDSA's -82.2% | |
| Quality / Margins | 28.1% margin vs EDSA's 0.0% | |
| Dividends | 2.7% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +203.8% vs MRK's +54.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.6% ROA vs EDSA's -75.2%, ROIC 22.0% vs -452.3% |
EDSA vs MRK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
EDSA vs MRK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK and EDSA operate at a comparable scale, with $64.9B and $0 in trailing revenue.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $64.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$11M | $32.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$10M | $18.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$8M | $12.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +74.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +41.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +28.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +4.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -66.7% | -19.6% |
Valuation Metrics
EDSA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $50M | $298.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $39M | $334.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -4.45x | 16.59x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 23.50x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.78x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 11.40x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 4.59x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.58x | 5.75x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 24.13x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MRK leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MRK delivers a 36.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $36 in annual profit, vs $-82 for EDSA. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MRK scores 4/9 vs EDSA's 2/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -82.3% | +36.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -75.2% | +14.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -4.5% | +22.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -109.6% | +23.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.96x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$11M | $36.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $11M | $14.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $50.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 19.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MRK leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MRK five years ago would be worth $17,802 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,382 for EDSA. Over the past 12 months, EDSA leads with a +203.8% total return vs MRK's +54.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MRK at 5.8% vs EDSA's -1.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +276.7% | +14.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +203.8% | +54.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -3.9% | +18.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -86.2% | +78.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.3% | +172.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.3% | +5.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — EDSA and MRK 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 MRK's 0.34 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MRK currently trades 96.5% 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 | -0.29x | 0.34x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $20.32 | $125.14 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.72 | $76.66 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +27.8% | +96.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 34.3 | 55.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 617K | 7.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates EDSA as "Buy" and MRK as "Buy". MRK is the only dividend payer here at 2.70% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $130.69 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 2 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.7% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.26 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.7% |
MRK leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). EDSA leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
EDSA vs MRK: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EDSA or MRK a better buy right now?
Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) offers the better valuation at 16. 6x trailing P/E (23. 5x 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 is the better long-term investment — EDSA or MRK?
Over the past 5 years, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) delivered a total return of +78. 0%, compared to -86. 2% for Edesa Biotech, Inc. (EDSA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MRK returned +172. 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.
03Which is safer — EDSA or MRK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Edesa Biotech, Inc.
(EDSA) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 29β versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 0. 34β — meaning MRK is approximately -219% more volatile than EDSA relative to the S&P 500.
04Which is growing faster — EDSA or MRK?
On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Edesa Biotech, Inc.
grew EPS 34. 2% year-over-year, compared to 8. 0% for Merck & Co. , 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.
05Which has better profit margins — EDSA or MRK?
Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the more profitable company, earning 28. 1% net margin versus 0. 0% for Edesa Biotech, Inc. — meaning it keeps 28. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MRK leads at 36. 2% versus 0. 0% for EDSA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MRK leads at 72. 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — EDSA or MRK?
In this comparison, MRK (2.
7% yield) pays a dividend. EDSA does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
07Is EDSA 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. 34), 2. 7% yield, +172. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MRK: +172. 8%, EDSA: -99. 3%), 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 EDSA 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: EDSA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock. MRK pays a dividend while EDSA 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.