Drug Manufacturers - General
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
GRFS vs BCRX vs RARE vs HALO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
GRFS vs BCRX vs RARE vs HALO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - General | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $6.85B | $1.81B | $2.57B | $7.55B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $7.51B | $886M | $669M | $1.40B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $401M | $-458M | $-609M | $317M |
| Gross Margin | 38.4% | 18.9% | 83.6% | 81.9% |
| Operating Margin | 17.0% | -43.1% | -83.9% | 58.4% |
| Forward P/E | 9.4x | 7.1x | — | 8.0x |
| Total Debt | $8.74B | $477M | $1.28B | $0.00 |
| Cash & Equiv. | $825M | $90M | $434M | $134M |
GRFS vs BCRX vs RARE vs HALO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grifols, S.A. (GRFS) | 100 | 42.8 | -57.2% |
| BioCryst Pharmaceut… (BCRX) | 100 | 191.6 | +91.6% |
| Ultragenyx Pharmace… (RARE) | 100 | 38.2 | -61.8% |
| Halozyme Therapeuti… (HALO) | 100 | 264.2 | +164.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: GRFS vs BCRX vs RARE vs HALO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
GRFS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 1.10, yield 2.6%
- 2.6% yield; 2-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend
- +13.4% vs RARE's -27.4%
BCRX is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 94.1%, EPS growth 381.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 47.8%
- 94.1% revenue growth vs GRFS's 0.2%
- Lower P/E (7.1x vs 8.0x)
RARE lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
HALO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 5.6% 10Y total return vs BCRX's 181.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.51, current ratio 4.66x
- Beta 0.51, current ratio 4.66x
- 22.7% margin vs RARE's -91.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 94.1% revenue growth vs GRFS's 0.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (7.1x vs 8.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 22.7% margin vs RARE's -91.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.51 vs RARE's 1.36 | |
| Dividends | 2.6% yield; 2-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +13.4% vs RARE's -27.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.5% ROA vs BCRX's -97.3%, ROIC 73.4% vs 96.7% |
GRFS vs BCRX vs RARE vs HALO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
GRFS vs BCRX vs RARE vs HALO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HALO leads in 4 of 6 categories
GRFS leads 1 • BCRX leads 0 • RARE leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HALO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
GRFS is the larger business by revenue, generating $7.5B annually — 11.2x RARE's $669M. HALO is the more profitable business, keeping 22.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RARE's -91.0%. On growth, HALO holds the edge at +51.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $7.5B | $886M | $669M | $1.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.6B | -$377M | -$536M | $945M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $401M | -$458M | -$609M | $317M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $772M | $294M | -$487M | $645M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +38.4% | +18.9% | +83.6% | +81.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +17.0% | -43.1% | -83.9% | +58.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.3% | -51.7% | -91.0% | +22.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +10.3% | +33.1% | -72.8% | +46.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -0.6% | +7.5% | -2.4% | +51.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +40.0% | — | -17.2% | -2.1% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — GRFS and BCRX each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 7.1x trailing earnings, BCRX trades at a 72% valuation discount to HALO's 25.0x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, BCRX's 6.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than GRFS's 8.5x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $6.9B | $1.8B | $2.6B | $7.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $16.1B | $2.2B | $3.4B | $7.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.11x | 7.12x | -4.48x | 25.05x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.35x | — | — | 7.96x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 1.09x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.49x | 6.42x | — | 8.20x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.81x | 2.07x | 3.82x | 5.41x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.62x | — | — | 162.76x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 7.77x | 5.53x | — | 11.72x |
Profitability & Efficiency
HALO leads this category, winning 5 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HALO delivers a 6.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-6 for RARE. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BCRX scores 7/9 vs RARE's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +5.2% | — | -6.1% | +6.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.0% | -97.3% | -45.8% | +12.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.4% | +96.7% | -89.4% | +73.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.4% | +105.2% | -46.4% | +38.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.15x | — | — | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $7.9B | $388M | $842M | -$134M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $825M | $90M | $434M | $134M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $8.7B | $477M | $1.3B | $0 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.05x | -10.66x | -14.49x | 46.08x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HALO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in HALO five years ago would be worth $13,909 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,391 for RARE. Over the past 12 months, GRFS leads with a +13.4% total return vs RARE's -27.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HALO at 28.4% vs RARE's -17.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -12.3% | +14.9% | +10.7% | -8.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +13.4% | -13.1% | -27.4% | -5.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.5% | +1.5% | -44.5% | +111.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -53.6% | -27.7% | -76.1% | +39.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -35.2% | +181.7% | -59.4% | +559.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +3.1% | +0.5% | -17.8% | +28.4% |
Risk & Volatility
HALO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
HALO is the less volatile stock with a 0.51 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RARE's 1.36 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. HALO currently trades 78.0% from its 52-week high vs RARE's 61.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.10x | 0.83x | 1.36x | 0.51x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.14 | $11.31 | $42.37 | $82.22 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.09 | $6.00 | $18.29 | $47.50 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.7% | +76.2% | +61.6% | +78.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 45.4 | 46.1 | 67.7 | 47.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 681K | 5.3M | 1.8M | 1.4M |
Analyst Outlook
GRFS leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: GRFS as "Buy", BCRX as "Buy", RARE as "Buy", HALO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 95.6% upside for BCRX (target: $17) vs 17.9% for HALO (target: $76). GRFS is the only dividend payer here at 2.62% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $16.86 | $48.36 | $75.60 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 29 | 33 | 27 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.6% | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | — | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.18 | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.5% |
HALO leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). GRFS leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
GRFS vs BCRX vs RARE vs HALO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is GRFS or BCRX or RARE or HALO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(BCRX) is the stronger pick with 94. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 0. 2% for Grifols, S. A. (GRFS). BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (BCRX) offers the better valuation at 7. 1x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Grifols, S. A. (GRFS) 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 — GRFS or BCRX or RARE or HALO?
On trailing P/E, BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(BCRX) is the cheapest at 7. 1x versus Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. at 25. 0x. On forward P/E, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — GRFS or BCRX or RARE or HALO?
Over the past 5 years, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) delivered a total return of +39. 1%, compared to -76. 1% for Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical Inc. (RARE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HALO returned +559. 7% versus RARE's -59. 4%. 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 — GRFS or BCRX or RARE or HALO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 51β versus Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical Inc. 's 1. 36β — meaning RARE is approximately 166% more volatile than HALO relative to the S&P 500.
05Which is growing faster — GRFS or BCRX or RARE or HALO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(BCRX) is pulling ahead at 94. 1% versus 0. 2% for Grifols, S. A. (GRFS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. grew EPS 381. 4% year-over-year, compared to -25. 4% for Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, BCRX leads at 47. 8% 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 — GRFS or BCRX or RARE or HALO?
BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(BCRX) is the more profitable company, earning 30. 2% net margin versus -85. 4% for Ultragenyx Pharmaceutical Inc. — meaning it keeps 30. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HALO leads at 58. 4% versus -79. 5% for RARE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — BCRX leads at 97. 8%, 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 GRFS or BCRX or RARE or HALO more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) trades at 8. 0x forward P/E versus 9. 4x for Grifols, S. A. — 1. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for BCRX: 95. 6% to $16. 86.
08Which pays a better dividend — GRFS or BCRX or RARE or HALO?
In this comparison, GRFS (2.
6% yield) pays a dividend. BCRX, RARE, HALO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is GRFS or BCRX or RARE or HALO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 51), +559. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (HALO: +559. 7%, RARE: -59. 4%), 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 GRFS and BCRX and RARE and HALO?
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: GRFS is a small-cap deep-value stock; BCRX is a small-cap high-growth stock; RARE is a small-cap high-growth stock; HALO is a small-cap high-growth stock. GRFS pays a dividend while BCRX, RARE, HALO 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.