Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
EOLS vs ABBV vs ACLX vs SKIN vs INMD
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - General
Biotechnology
Household & Personal Products
Medical - Devices
EOLS vs ABBV vs ACLX vs SKIN vs INMD — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Drug Manufacturers - General | Biotechnology | Household & Personal Products | Medical - Devices |
| Market Cap | $421M | $358.42B | $6.73B | $118M | $882M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $301M | $61.16B | $22M | $296M | $375M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-43M | $4.23B | $-229M | $-6M | $87M |
| Gross Margin | 65.7% | 70.2% | -64.8% | 64.9% | 77.8% |
| Operating Margin | -9.6% | 26.7% | -11.4% | -3.6% | 21.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | 14.3x | — | — | 9.6x |
| Total Debt | $155M | $69.07B | $96M | $379M | $13M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $54M | $5.23B | $80M | $233M | $303M |
EOLS vs ABBV vs ACLX vs SKIN vs INMD — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Feb 22 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Evolus, Inc. (EOLS) | 100 | 69.8 | -30.2% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 137.1 | +37.1% |
| Arcellx, Inc. (ACLX) | 100 | 599.9 | +499.9% |
| The Beauty Health C… (SKIN) | 100 | 4.7 | -95.3% |
| InMode Ltd. (INMD) | 100 | 32.6 | -67.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EOLS vs ABBV vs ACLX vs SKIN vs INMD
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EOLS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 11.6%, EPS growth 1.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 26.0%
- 11.6% revenue growth vs ACLX's -79.4%
ABBV is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.34, yield 3.2%
- Beta 0.34 vs SKIN's 2.00
- 3.2% yield; 13-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
ACLX is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 5.8% 10Y total return vs ABBV's 295.5%
- +117.4% vs EOLS's -45.7%
Among these 5 stocks, SKIN doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
INMD carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.04, Low D/E 1.9%, current ratio 9.88x
- Beta 1.04, current ratio 9.88x
- Better valuation composite
- 23.3% margin vs ACLX's -10.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 11.6% revenue growth vs ACLX's -79.4% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 23.3% margin vs ACLX's -10.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.34 vs SKIN's 2.00 | |
| Dividends | 3.2% yield; 13-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +117.4% vs EOLS's -45.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.8% ROA vs ACLX's -36.2%, ROIC 13.5% vs -46.2% |
EOLS vs ABBV vs ACLX vs SKIN vs INMD — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
EOLS vs ABBV vs ACLX vs SKIN vs INMD — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ACLX leads in 2 of 6 categories
ABBV leads 1 • INMD leads 1 • EOLS leads 0 • SKIN leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABBV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABBV is the larger business by revenue, generating $61.2B annually — 2744.3x ACLX's $22M. INMD is the more profitable business, keeping 23.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ACLX's -10.3%. On growth, ABBV holds the edge at +10.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $301M | $61.2B | $22M | $296M | $375M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$21M | $24.5B | -$246M | $9M | $81M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$43M | $4.2B | -$229M | -$6M | $87M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$41M | $18.7B | -$213M | $29M | $91M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +65.7% | +70.2% | -64.8% | +64.9% | +77.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -9.6% | +26.7% | -11.4% | -3.6% | +21.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -14.4% | +6.9% | -10.3% | -2.0% | +23.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -13.7% | +30.6% | -9.5% | +9.8% | +24.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.2% | +10.0% | -89.2% | -6.7% | +5.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +46.7% | +57.4% | -13.6% | +38.0% | -30.8% |
Valuation Metrics
INMD leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.7x trailing earnings, INMD trades at a 89% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.5x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, INMD's 6.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than SKIN's 7331.2x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $421M | $358.4B | $6.7B | $118M | $882M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $522M | $422.3B | $6.7B | $264M | $593M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -7.99x | 85.50x | -28.27x | -5.69x | 9.73x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 14.28x | — | — | 9.64x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 0.98x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 14.96x | — | 7331.15x | 6.88x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.42x | 5.86x | 302.09x | 0.39x | 2.38x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | — | 16.10x | 2.02x | 1.33x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 20.12x | — | 3.17x | 10.46x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — ABBV and INMD each lead in 4 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 $-55 for ACLX. INMD carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SKIN's 6.20x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), SKIN scores 7/9 vs ACLX's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +62.1% | -55.4% | -9.4% | +13.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -19.4% | +3.1% | -36.2% | -1.2% | +11.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -44.5% | +23.9% | -46.2% | -6.8% | +13.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -23.5% | +21.5% | -46.6% | -4.5% | +12.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 7 | 3 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | — | 0.24x | 6.20x | 0.02x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $101M | $63.8B | $16M | $146M | -$289M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $54M | $5.2B | $80M | $233M | $303M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $155M | $69.1B | $96M | $379M | $13M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -1.92x | 3.28x | -8.45x | 0.81x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ACLX leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ACLX five years ago would be worth $68,494 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $707 for SKIN. Over the past 12 months, ACLX leads with a +117.4% total return vs EOLS's -45.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ACLX at 38.6% vs SKIN's -56.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -4.9% | -10.1% | +81.7% | -35.0% | -5.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -45.7% | +11.3% | +117.4% | -35.9% | -2.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -28.4% | +50.4% | +166.2% | -91.7% | -60.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -30.1% | +101.3% | +584.9% | -92.9% | -63.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -44.4% | +295.5% | +584.9% | -91.6% | +105.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -10.6% | +14.6% | +38.6% | -56.4% | -26.4% |
Risk & Volatility
ACLX leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ACLX is the less volatile stock with a -0.34 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than SKIN's 2.00 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ACLX currently trades 99.9% from its 52-week high vs SKIN's 33.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.27x | 0.34x | -0.34x | 2.00x | 1.04x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $12.16 | $244.81 | $115.13 | $2.69 | $16.74 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.86 | $176.57 | $47.86 | $0.76 | $12.72 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +52.5% | +82.8% | +99.9% | +33.8% | +83.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 76.1 | 46.8 | 79.9 | 52.1 | 39.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 5.8M | 1.6M | 760K | 804K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EOLS as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", ACLX as "Hold", SKIN as "Hold", INMD as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 134.7% upside for EOLS (target: $15) vs -2.3% for ACLX (target: $112). ABBV is the only dividend payer here at 3.24% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $15.00 | $256.64 | $112.45 | $1.30 | $16.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 13 | 41 | 18 | 13 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +3.2% | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 13 | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $6.57 | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +14.5% |
ACLX leads in 2 of 6 categories (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). ABBV leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 1 tied.
EOLS vs ABBV vs ACLX vs SKIN vs INMD: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EOLS or ABBV or ACLX or SKIN or INMD a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Evolus, Inc.
(EOLS) is the stronger pick with 11. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -79. 4% for Arcellx, Inc. (ACLX). InMode Ltd. (INMD) offers the better valuation at 9. 7x trailing P/E (9. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Evolus, Inc. (EOLS) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 — EOLS or ABBV or ACLX or SKIN or INMD?
On trailing P/E, InMode Ltd.
(INMD) is the cheapest at 9. 7x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 5x. On forward P/E, InMode Ltd. is actually cheaper at 9. 6x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EOLS or ABBV or ACLX or SKIN or INMD?
Over the past 5 years, Arcellx, Inc.
(ACLX) delivered a total return of +584. 9%, compared to -92. 9% for The Beauty Health Company (SKIN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ACLX returned +584. 9% versus SKIN's -91. 6%. 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 — EOLS or ABBV or ACLX or SKIN or INMD?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Arcellx, Inc.
(ACLX) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 34β versus The Beauty Health Company's 2. 00β — meaning SKIN is approximately -690% more volatile than ACLX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, InMode Ltd. (INMD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 6% for The Beauty Health Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EOLS or ABBV or ACLX or SKIN or INMD?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Evolus, Inc.
(EOLS) is pulling ahead at 11. 6% versus -79. 4% for Arcellx, Inc. (ACLX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Beauty Health Company grew EPS 55. 6% year-over-year, compared to -103. 5% for Arcellx, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, EOLS leads at 26. 0% 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 — EOLS or ABBV or ACLX or SKIN or INMD?
InMode Ltd.
(INMD) is the more profitable company, earning 25. 3% net margin versus -1027. 3% for Arcellx, Inc. — meaning it keeps 25. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ABBV leads at 32. 8% versus -1135. 6% for ACLX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — INMD leads at 78. 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.
07Is EOLS or ABBV or ACLX or SKIN or INMD more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, InMode Ltd.
(INMD) trades at 9. 6x forward P/E versus 14. 3x for AbbVie Inc. — 4. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EOLS: 134. 7% to $15. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — EOLS or ABBV or ACLX or SKIN or INMD?
In this comparison, ABBV (3.
2% yield) pays a dividend. EOLS, ACLX, SKIN, INMD do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is EOLS or ABBV or ACLX or SKIN or INMD better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Arcellx, Inc.
(ACLX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 34), +584. 9% 10Y return). The Beauty Health Company (SKIN) carries a higher beta of 2. 00 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ACLX: +584. 9%, SKIN: -91. 6%), 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 EOLS and ABBV and ACLX and SKIN and INMD?
These companies operate in different sectors (EOLS (Healthcare) and ABBV (Healthcare) and ACLX (Healthcare) and SKIN (Consumer Defensive) and INMD (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: EOLS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ABBV is a large-cap income-oriented stock; ACLX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; SKIN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INMD is a small-cap deep-value stock. ABBV pays a dividend while EOLS, ACLX, SKIN, INMD 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.