Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
GHRS vs DBVT vs ABBV vs ALKS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Biotechnology
GHRS vs DBVT vs ABBV vs ALKS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $1.30B | $1712.35T | $358.42B | $5.90B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $61.16B | $1.56B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-48M | $-168M | $4.23B | $153M |
| Gross Margin | — | — | 70.2% | 65.4% |
| Operating Margin | — | — | 26.7% | 12.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 14.3x | 24.8x |
| Total Debt | $512K | $22M | $69.07B | $70M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $246M | $194M | $5.23B | $1.12B |
GHRS vs DBVT vs ABBV vs ALKS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| GH Research PLC (GHRS) | 100 | 96.7 | -3.3% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 36.6 | -63.4% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 179.9 | +79.9% |
| Alkermes plc (ALKS) | 100 | 144.4 | +44.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: GHRS vs DBVT vs ABBV vs ALKS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
GHRS lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
DBVT is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +110.4% vs ABBV's +11.3%
ABBV carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.34, yield 3.2%
- Rev growth 8.6%, EPS growth -0.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 1.8%
- 295.5% 10Y total return vs GHRS's 9.1%
- Beta 0.34, yield 3.2%, current ratio 0.67x
ALKS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.06, Low D/E 3.8%, current ratio 3.55x
- 9.8% margin vs DBVT's 0.3%
- 5.4% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.6% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 9.8% margin vs DBVT's 0.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.34 vs GHRS's 1.72 | |
| Dividends | 3.2% yield; 13-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +110.4% vs ABBV's +11.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.4% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0% |
GHRS vs DBVT vs ABBV vs ALKS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
GHRS vs DBVT vs ABBV vs ALKS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ABBV leads in 2 of 6 categories
ALKS leads 2 • GHRS leads 1 • DBVT 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 and DBVT operate at a comparable scale, with $61.2B and $0 in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 9.8% (ALKS) to 6.9% (ABBV). On growth, ALKS holds the edge at +28.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $0 | $61.2B | $1.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$60M | -$112M | $24.5B | $212M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$48M | -$168M | $4.2B | $153M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$44M | -$151M | $18.7B | $392M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | — | +70.2% | +65.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | — | +26.7% | +12.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | — | +6.9% | +9.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | — | +30.6% | +25.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +10.0% | +28.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -35.3% | +91.5% | +57.4% | -4.1% |
Valuation Metrics
ALKS leads this category, winning 2 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 24.8x trailing earnings, ALKS trades at a 71% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.5x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, ABBV's 15.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ALKS's 17.3x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.3B | $1712.35T | $358.4B | $5.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.1B | $1712.35T | $422.3B | $4.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -26.59x | -0.76x | 85.50x | 24.76x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 14.28x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 14.96x | 17.25x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | — | 5.86x | 4.00x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.59x | 0.66x | — | 3.28x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 20.12x | 12.28x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ALKS leads this category, winning 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 $-130 for DBVT. GHRS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to DBVT's 0.13x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ALKS scores 7/9 vs GHRS's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -16.3% | -130.2% | +62.1% | +8.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -15.8% | -89.0% | +3.1% | +5.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -80.7% | — | +23.9% | +18.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -26.4% | -145.7% | +21.5% | +14.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.13x | — | 0.04x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$246M | -$172M | $63.8B | -$1.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $246M | $194M | $5.2B | $1.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $512,000 | $22M | $69.1B | $70M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -109.68x | -189.82x | 3.28x | 32.30x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
GHRS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABBV five years ago would be worth $20,131 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,090 for DBVT. Over the past 12 months, DBVT leads with a +110.4% total return vs ABBV's +11.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GHRS at 33.1% vs ALKS's 4.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +58.7% | +4.9% | -10.1% | +25.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +104.6% | +110.4% | +11.3% | +16.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +135.8% | +19.7% | +50.4% | +14.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.1% | -69.1% | +101.3% | +60.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.1% | -87.0% | +295.5% | -11.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +33.1% | +6.2% | +14.6% | +4.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ABBV and ALKS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABBV is the less volatile stock with a 0.34 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GHRS's 1.72 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ALKS currently trades 96.7% from its 52-week high vs DBVT's 76.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.72x | 1.26x | 0.34x | 1.06x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $24.66 | $26.18 | $244.81 | $36.60 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $9.46 | $7.53 | $176.57 | $25.17 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.2% | +76.3% | +82.8% | +96.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 69.3 | 48.1 | 46.8 | 60.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 227K | 252K | 5.8M | 2.3M |
Analyst Outlook
ABBV leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: GHRS as "Buy", DBVT as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", ALKS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 131.8% upside for DBVT (target: $46) vs 24.3% for ALKS (target: $44). 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 | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $36.50 | $46.33 | $256.64 | $44.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 15 | 41 | 28 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +3.2% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 13 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $6.57 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.3% | +0.5% |
ABBV leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). ALKS leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). 1 tied.
GHRS vs DBVT vs ABBV vs ALKS: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is GHRS or DBVT or ABBV or ALKS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the stronger pick with 8. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 2% for Alkermes plc (ALKS). Alkermes plc (ALKS) offers the better valuation at 24. 8x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate GH Research PLC (GHRS) a "Buy" — based on 8 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 — GHRS or DBVT or ABBV or ALKS?
On trailing P/E, Alkermes plc (ALKS) is the cheapest at 24.
8x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 5x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — GHRS or DBVT or ABBV or ALKS?
Over the past 5 years, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) delivered a total return of +101. 3%, compared to -69. 1% for DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABBV returned +295. 5% versus DBVT's -87. 0%. 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 — GHRS or DBVT or ABBV or ALKS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 34β versus GH Research PLC's 1. 72β — meaning GHRS is approximately 409% more volatile than ABBV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, GH Research PLC (GHRS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 13% for DBV Technologies S. A. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — GHRS or DBVT or ABBV or ALKS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is pulling ahead at 8. 6% versus -5. 2% for Alkermes plc (ALKS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: AbbVie Inc. grew EPS -0. 8% year-over-year, compared to -347. 5% for DBV Technologies S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ALKS leads at 9. 9% 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 — GHRS or DBVT or ABBV or ALKS?
Alkermes plc (ALKS) is the more profitable company, earning 16.
4% net margin versus 0. 0% for DBV Technologies S. A. — meaning it keeps 16. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ABBV leads at 32. 8% versus 0. 0% for DBVT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ALKS leads at 86. 7%, 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 GHRS or DBVT or ABBV or ALKS more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DBVT: 131.
8% to $46. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — GHRS or DBVT or ABBV or ALKS?
In this comparison, ABBV (3.
2% yield) pays a dividend. GHRS, DBVT, ALKS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is GHRS or DBVT or ABBV or ALKS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 34), 3. 2% yield, +295. 5% 10Y return). GH Research PLC (GHRS) carries a higher beta of 1. 72 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABBV: +295. 5%, GHRS: +9. 1%), 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 GHRS and DBVT and ABBV and ALKS?
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: GHRS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; DBVT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; ABBV is a large-cap income-oriented stock; ALKS is a small-cap quality compounder stock. ABBV pays a dividend while GHRS, DBVT, ALKS 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.