Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
GLTO vs PRTA vs IMVT vs RCUS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
GLTO vs PRTA vs IMVT vs RCUS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $40M | $567M | $5.53B | $2.50B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $58M | $0.00 | $236M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-210M | $-151M | $-464M | $-369M |
| Gross Margin | — | -39.7% | — | 90.7% |
| Operating Margin | — | -210.6% | — | -168.6% |
| Forward P/E | — | 42.7x | — | — |
| Total Debt | $1M | $14M | $98K | $99M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $258M | $308M | $714M | $222M |
GLTO vs PRTA vs IMVT vs RCUS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Galecto, Inc. (GLTO) | 100 | 6.7 | -93.3% |
| Prothena Corporatio… (PRTA) | 100 | 96.5 | -3.5% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 62.4 | -37.6% |
| Arcus Biosciences, … (RCUS) | 100 | 113.7 | +13.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: GLTO vs PRTA vs IMVT vs RCUS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
GLTO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.03, Low D/E 0.6%, current ratio 12.98x
- Beta 1.03, current ratio 12.98x
- +8.3% vs PRTA's +44.4%
PRTA is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- beta 0.96
- Beta 0.96 vs RCUS's 1.95, lower leverage
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 173.6% 10Y total return vs RCUS's 45.9%
- 3.2% margin vs PRTA's -260.9%
RCUS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth -4.3%, EPS growth -4.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 30.2%
- -4.3% revenue growth vs GLTO's -8.9%
- -35.3% ROA vs GLTO's -279.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | -4.3% revenue growth vs GLTO's -8.9% | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.2% margin vs PRTA's -260.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.96 vs RCUS's 1.95, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +8.3% vs PRTA's +44.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -35.3% ROA vs GLTO's -279.5% |
GLTO vs PRTA vs IMVT vs RCUS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
GLTO vs PRTA vs IMVT vs RCUS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IMVT leads in 2 of 6 categories
GLTO leads 0 • PRTA leads 0 • RCUS leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — PRTA and RCUS each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RCUS and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $236M and $0 in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from -156.4% (RCUS) to -2.6% (PRTA). On growth, PRTA holds the edge at +17.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $58M | $0 | $236M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$37M | -$121M | -$487M | -$391M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$210M | -$151M | -$464M | -$369M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$7M | -$85M | -$423M | -$489M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | -39.7% | — | +90.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -2.1% | — | -168.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -2.6% | — | -156.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -147.2% | — | -2.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +17.1% | — | -39.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +139.6% | +153.6% | +19.7% | +10.5% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — GLTO and IMVT and RCUS each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $40M | $567M | $5.5B | $2.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$216M | $273M | $4.8B | $2.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -6.28x | -2.32x | -9.97x | -7.54x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 42.68x | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 58.54x | — | 10.11x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.24x | 2.02x | 5.83x | 4.22x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
IMVT leads this category, winning 5 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IMVT delivers a -47.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-47 in annual profit, vs $-3 for GLTO. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to RCUS's 0.16x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IMVT scores 2/9 vs RCUS's 0/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -3.1% | -49.9% | -47.1% | -69.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.8% | -42.3% | -44.1% | -35.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -21.0% | — | -64.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -28.5% | -47.0% | -66.1% | -42.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.05x | 0.00x | 0.16x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$256M | -$294M | -$714M | -$123M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $258M | $308M | $714M | $222M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1M | $14M | $98,000 | $99M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | — | -13.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
IMVT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IMVT five years ago would be worth $16,241 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,855 for GLTO. Over the past 12 months, GLTO leads with a +825.9% total return vs PRTA's +44.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IMVT at 12.1% vs PRTA's -48.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +14.6% | +14.5% | +5.1% | +6.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +825.9% | +44.4% | +96.1% | +209.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -51.0% | -86.3% | +40.9% | +24.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -81.4% | -57.2% | +62.4% | -18.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.3% | -73.0% | +173.6% | +45.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -21.2% | -48.5% | +12.1% | +7.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PRTA and IMVT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PRTA is the less volatile stock with a 0.96 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RCUS's 1.95 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IMVT currently trades 90.5% from its 52-week high vs GLTO's 65.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.03x | 0.96x | 1.37x | 1.95x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $38.33 | $11.69 | $30.09 | $28.72 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.45 | $4.32 | $13.36 | $7.06 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +65.2% | +90.1% | +90.5% | +86.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 45.8 | 60.3 | 60.2 | 60.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 111K | 474K | 1.4M | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: GLTO as "Buy", PRTA as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", RCUS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 80.4% upside for PRTA (target: $19) vs 21.0% for RCUS (target: $30).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $43.67 | $19.00 | $45.50 | $30.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 28 | 23 | 18 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
IMVT leads in 2 of 6 categories — strongest in Profitability & Efficiency and Total Returns. 3 categories are tied.
GLTO vs PRTA vs IMVT vs RCUS: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is GLTO or PRTA or IMVT or RCUS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Arcus Biosciences, Inc.
(RCUS) is the stronger pick with -4. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -92. 8% for Prothena Corporation plc (PRTA). Analysts rate Galecto, Inc. (GLTO) a "Buy" — based on 5 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 — GLTO or PRTA or IMVT or RCUS?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +62. 4%, compared to -81. 4% for Galecto, Inc. (GLTO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +173. 6% versus GLTO's -93. 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 — GLTO or PRTA or IMVT or RCUS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Prothena Corporation plc (PRTA) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
96β versus Arcus Biosciences, Inc. 's 1. 95β — meaning RCUS is approximately 103% more volatile than PRTA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 16% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — GLTO or PRTA or IMVT or RCUS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Arcus Biosciences, Inc.
(RCUS) is pulling ahead at -4. 3% versus -92. 8% for Prothena Corporation plc (PRTA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Galecto, Inc. grew EPS 78. 5% year-over-year, compared to -99. 6% for Prothena Corporation plc. Over a 3-year CAGR, RCUS leads at 30. 2% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — GLTO or PRTA or IMVT or RCUS?
Galecto, Inc.
(GLTO) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -25. 2% for Prothena Corporation plc — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GLTO leads at 0. 0% versus -1905. 8% for PRTA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RCUS leads at 96. 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.
06Is GLTO or PRTA or IMVT or RCUS more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PRTA: 80.
4% to $19. 00.
07Which pays a better dividend — GLTO or PRTA or IMVT or RCUS?
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.
08Is GLTO or PRTA or IMVT or RCUS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Prothena Corporation plc (PRTA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
96)). Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) carries a higher beta of 1. 95 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (PRTA: -73. 0%, RCUS: +45. 9%), 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.
09What are the main differences between GLTO and PRTA and IMVT and RCUS?
Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
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.