Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
FHTX vs AUPH vs PRAX vs IQV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
FHTX vs AUPH vs PRAX vs IQV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $252M | $2.02B | $9.53B | $30.33B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $31M | $283M | $0.00 | $16.63B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-74M | $287M | $-327M | $1.39B |
| Gross Margin | 29.8% | 88.5% | — | 26.1% |
| Operating Margin | -265.6% | 37.1% | — | 13.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | 18.7x | — | 14.0x |
| Total Debt | $41M | $75M | $110K | $16.17B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $81M | $80M | $357M | $1.98B |
FHTX vs AUPH vs PRAX vs IQV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Foghorn Therapeutic… (FHTX) | 100 | 27.8 | -72.2% |
| Aurinia Pharmaceuti… (AUPH) | 100 | 97.1 | -2.9% |
| Praxis Precision Me… (PRAX) | 100 | 62.9 | -37.1% |
| IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) | 100 | 116.1 | +16.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: FHTX vs AUPH vs PRAX vs IQV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
FHTX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth is your priority.
- 36.8% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0%
AUPH carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 0.89
- Rev growth 20.4%, EPS growth 51.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 28.3%
- 5.1% 10Y total return vs IQV's 166.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.89, Low D/E 12.9%, current ratio 5.25x
PRAX is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +7.7% vs FHTX's -2.0%
IQV is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Better valuation composite
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 36.8% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 101.5% margin vs FHTX's -240.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.89 vs FHTX's 2.07 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +7.7% vs FHTX's -2.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 38.2% ROA vs PRAX's -40.2%, ROIC 16.6% vs -65.0% |
FHTX vs AUPH vs PRAX vs IQV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
FHTX vs AUPH vs PRAX vs IQV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AUPH leads in 2 of 6 categories
IQV leads 1 • PRAX leads 1 • FHTX leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AUPH leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IQV and PRAX operate at a comparable scale, with $16.6B and $0 in trailing revenue. AUPH is the more profitable business, keeping 101.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FHTX's -2.4%. On growth, FHTX holds the edge at +2.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $31M | $283M | $0 | $16.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$79M | $105M | -$357M | $3.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$74M | $287M | -$327M | $1.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$86M | $135M | -$283M | $2.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +29.8% | +88.5% | — | +26.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.7% | +37.1% | — | +13.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -2.4% | +101.5% | — | +8.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.8% | +47.8% | — | +16.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.2% | +28.8% | — | +8.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -12.9% | +152.0% | +2.7% | +15.0% |
Valuation Metrics
IQV leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.4x trailing earnings, AUPH trades at a 68% valuation discount to IQV's 22.8x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, IQV's 13.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than AUPH's 19.2x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $252M | $2.0B | $9.5B | $30.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $212M | $2.0B | $9.2B | $44.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -3.76x | 7.36x | -24.48x | 22.79x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 18.73x | — | 13.96x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.56x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 19.16x | — | 12.98x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 8.14x | 7.12x | — | 1.86x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 3.63x | 8.46x | 4.68x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 14.88x | — | 14.79x |
Profitability & Efficiency
AUPH leads this category, winning 5 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
AUPH delivers a 49.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $49 in annual profit, vs $-43 for PRAX. PRAX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IQV's 2.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AUPH scores 7/9 vs FHTX's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +49.4% | -43.0% | +22.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -33.5% | +38.2% | -40.2% | +4.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +16.6% | -65.0% | +8.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -46.2% | +18.9% | -49.3% | +11.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.13x | 0.00x | 2.44x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$40M | -$5M | -$357M | $14.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $81M | $80M | $357M | $2.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $41M | $75M | $110,000 | $16.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | — | 3.10x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PRAX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in AUPH five years ago would be worth $15,230 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,521 for FHTX. Over the past 12 months, PRAX leads with a +767.1% total return vs FHTX's -2.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PRAX at 174.0% vs FHTX's -6.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -14.5% | -0.8% | +15.2% | -20.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -2.0% | +87.8% | +767.1% | +16.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -18.2% | +36.1% | +1956.2% | -5.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -54.8% | +52.3% | -14.9% | -22.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -75.5% | +511.6% | -20.9% | +166.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -6.5% | +10.8% | +174.0% | -2.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — AUPH and PRAX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
AUPH is the less volatile stock with a 0.89 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FHTX's 2.07 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PRAX currently trades 92.7% from its 52-week high vs FHTX's 63.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.07x | 0.89x | 1.40x | 1.32x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $6.95 | $16.88 | $356.00 | $247.05 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.27 | $7.29 | $35.21 | $134.65 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +63.9% | +90.2% | +92.7% | +72.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 31.8 | 44.4 | 53.3 | 60.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 150K | 1.1M | 376K | 1.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FHTX as "Buy", AUPH as "Buy", PRAX as "Buy", IQV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 162.8% upside for FHTX (target: $12) vs 5.1% for AUPH (target: $16).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $11.67 | $16.00 | $548.80 | $223.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 9 | 14 | 16 | 44 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +4.9% | 0.0% | +4.1% |
AUPH leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). IQV leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
FHTX vs AUPH vs PRAX vs IQV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is FHTX or AUPH or PRAX or IQV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Foghorn Therapeutics Inc.
(FHTX) is the stronger pick with 36. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc. (AUPH) offers the better valuation at 7. 4x trailing P/E (18. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Foghorn Therapeutics Inc. (FHTX) a "Buy" — based on 9 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 — FHTX or AUPH or PRAX or IQV?
On trailing P/E, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(AUPH) is the cheapest at 7. 4x versus IQVIA Holdings Inc. at 22. 8x. On forward P/E, IQVIA Holdings Inc. is actually cheaper at 14. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — FHTX or AUPH or PRAX or IQV?
Over the past 5 years, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(AUPH) delivered a total return of +52. 3%, compared to -54. 8% for Foghorn Therapeutics Inc. (FHTX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AUPH returned +511. 6% versus FHTX's -75. 5%. 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 — FHTX or AUPH or PRAX or IQV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(AUPH) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 89β versus Foghorn Therapeutics Inc. 's 2. 07β — meaning FHTX is approximately 133% more volatile than AUPH relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 2% for IQVIA Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — FHTX or AUPH or PRAX or IQV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Foghorn Therapeutics Inc.
(FHTX) is pulling ahead at 36. 8% versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc. grew EPS 51. 7% year-over-year, compared to -32. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AUPH leads at 28. 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 — FHTX or AUPH or PRAX or IQV?
Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(AUPH) is the more profitable company, earning 101. 5% net margin versus -240. 3% for Foghorn Therapeutics Inc. — meaning it keeps 101. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AUPH leads at 37. 1% versus -265. 6% for FHTX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FHTX leads at 89. 2%, 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 FHTX or AUPH or PRAX or IQV more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) trades at 14. 0x forward P/E versus 18. 7x for Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc. — 4. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for FHTX: 162. 8% to $11. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — FHTX or AUPH or PRAX or IQV?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
09Is FHTX or AUPH or PRAX or IQV better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(AUPH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 89), +511. 6% 10Y return). Foghorn Therapeutics Inc. (FHTX) carries a higher beta of 2. 07 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (AUPH: +511. 6%, FHTX: -75. 5%), 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 FHTX and AUPH and PRAX and IQV?
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: FHTX is a small-cap high-growth stock; AUPH is a small-cap high-growth stock; PRAX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IQV is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. 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.