Drug Manufacturers - General
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
GRFS vs OCSL vs TAK vs ARCC vs GBDC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Financial - Credit Services
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Asset Management
Asset Management
GRFS vs OCSL vs TAK vs ARCC vs GBDC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - General | Financial - Credit Services | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Asset Management | Asset Management |
| Market Cap | $6.82B | $1.08B | $52.57B | $13.61B | $3.43B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $7.51B | $300M | $4.49T | $3.15B | $871M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $401M | $50M | $114.75B | $1.15B | $205M |
| Gross Margin | 38.4% | 87.2% | 62.1% | 75.7% | 81.5% |
| Operating Margin | 17.0% | 50.4% | 8.3% | 69.7% | 78.9% |
| Forward P/E | 9.2x | 8.1x | 0.2x | 9.9x | 9.2x |
| Total Debt | $8.74B | $1.49B | $4.52T | $15.99B | $4.90B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $825M | $80M | $385.11B | $924M | $24M |
GRFS vs OCSL vs TAK vs ARCC vs GBDC — 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 | 42.6 | -57.4% |
| Oaktree Specialty L… (OCSL) | 100 | 89.8 | -10.2% |
| Takeda Pharmaceutic… (TAK) | 100 | 85.3 | -14.7% |
| Ares Capital Corpor… (ARCC) | 100 | 128.5 | +28.5% |
| Golub Capital BDC, … (GBDC) | 100 | 108.3 | +8.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: GRFS vs OCSL vs TAK vs ARCC vs GBDC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, GRFS doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
OCSL is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if defensive and bank quality is your priority.
- Beta 0.64, yield 14.1%, current ratio 11.20x
- NIM 6.4% vs ARCC's 3.6%
- 60.9% NII/revenue growth vs GRFS's 0.2%
- 14.1% yield, vs TAK's 3.6%
TAK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.33, yield 3.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.33, Low D/E 65.1%, current ratio 1.01x
- PEG 0.01 vs ARCC's 0.96
- Lower P/E (0.2x vs 9.2x), PEG 0.01 vs 0.30
ARCC ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 139.2% 10Y total return vs GBDC's 61.0%
- 3.8% ROA vs TAK's 0.7%, ROIC 5.7% vs 2.3%
GBDC is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 42.5%, EPS growth 4.4%
- 43.2% margin vs TAK's 2.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 60.9% NII/revenue growth vs GRFS's 0.2% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.2x vs 9.2x), PEG 0.01 vs 0.30 | |
| Quality / Margins | 43.2% margin vs TAK's 2.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs GRFS's 1.12, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 14.1% yield, vs TAK's 3.6% | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +14.6% vs ARCC's +0.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 3.8% ROA vs TAK's 0.7%, ROIC 5.7% vs 2.3% |
GRFS vs OCSL vs TAK vs ARCC vs GBDC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
GRFS vs OCSL vs TAK vs ARCC vs GBDC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
GRFS leads in 1 of 6 categories
TAK leads 1 • OCSL leads 0 • ARCC leads 0 • GBDC leads 0 • 4 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — OCSL and TAK and GBDC each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TAK is the larger business by revenue, generating $4.49T annually — 14968.4x OCSL's $300M. GBDC is the more profitable business, keeping 43.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TAK's 2.6%. On growth, TAK holds the edge at +6.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $7.5B | $300M | $4.49T | $3.1B | $871M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.6B | $129M | $1.14T | $2.0B | $431M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $401M | $50M | $114.8B | $1.1B | $205M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $772M | $13M | $956.6B | $1.1B | $313M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +38.4% | +87.2% | +62.1% | +75.7% | +81.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +17.0% | +50.4% | +8.3% | +69.7% | +78.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +5.3% | +11.3% | +2.6% | +41.3% | +43.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +10.3% | +47.5% | +21.3% | +36.3% | -13.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -0.6% | — | +6.0% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +40.0% | +50.0% | +3.4% | -63.9% | -160.0% |
Valuation Metrics
GRFS leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.3x trailing earnings, GBDC trades at a 88% valuation discount to TAK's 77.4x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), GBDC offers better value at 0.30x vs TAK's 4.09x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $6.8B | $1.1B | $52.6B | $13.6B | $3.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $16.1B | $2.5B | $79.0B | $28.7B | $8.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.03x | 31.31x | 77.38x | 10.19x | 9.26x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 9.20x | 8.07x | 0.23x | 9.92x | 9.15x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 4.09x | 0.99x | 0.30x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.47x | 16.44x | 11.19x | 13.09x | 12.08x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.80x | 3.59x | 1.79x | 4.33x | 3.93x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.61x | 0.72x | 1.20x | 0.93x | 0.88x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 7.72x | 7.55x | 9.60x | 11.92x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — OCSL and ARCC each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ARCC delivers a 8.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $8 in annual profit, vs $2 for TAK. TAK carries lower financial leverage with a 0.65x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to GBDC's 1.23x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), OCSL scores 7/9 vs GBDC's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +5.2% | +3.4% | +1.5% | +8.1% | +5.2% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +2.0% | +1.7% | +0.7% | +3.8% | +2.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +5.4% | +3.7% | +2.3% | +5.7% | +5.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +6.4% | +4.9% | +2.8% | +7.5% | +7.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.15x | 1.01x | 0.65x | 1.12x | 1.23x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $7.9B | $1.4B | $4.13T | $15.1B | $4.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $825M | $80M | $385.1B | $924M | $24M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $8.7B | $1.5B | $4.52T | $16.0B | $4.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 2.05x | 1.18x | 1.97x | 2.98x | 1.62x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — TAK and ARCC and GBDC each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ARCC five years ago would be worth $14,704 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,715 for GRFS. Over the past 12 months, TAK leads with a +14.6% total return vs ARCC's +0.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors GBDC at 10.6% vs OCSL's -0.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -12.8% | -0.9% | +8.4% | -4.9% | -0.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +12.5% | +3.7% | +14.6% | +0.4% | +3.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +8.9% | -1.1% | +8.5% | +34.2% | +35.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -52.8% | +11.0% | +17.6% | +47.0% | +33.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -35.4% | +89.5% | -1.4% | +139.2% | +61.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.9% | -0.4% | +2.7% | +10.3% | +10.6% |
Risk & Volatility
TAK leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TAK is the less volatile stock with a 0.33 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than GRFS's 1.12 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TAK currently trades 88.1% from its 52-week high vs GRFS's 72.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.12x | 0.64x | 0.33x | 0.77x | 0.64x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $11.14 | $14.77 | $18.89 | $23.42 | $15.63 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.09 | $10.63 | $12.99 | $17.40 | $11.77 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.4% | +82.7% | +88.1% | +81.0% | +84.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.6 | 53.5 | 39.5 | 56.7 | 52.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 714K | 983K | 2.8M | 7.5M | 2.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — GRFS and OCSL and TAK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: GRFS as "Buy", OCSL as "Hold", TAK as "Buy", ARCC as "Buy", GBDC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 15.4% upside for ARCC (target: $22) vs -1.7% for OCSL (target: $12). For income investors, OCSL offers the higher dividend yield at 14.10% vs ARCC's 2.02%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $12.00 | — | $21.88 | $14.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 12 | 6 | 32 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +2.6% | +14.1% | +3.6% | +2.0% | +10.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.18 | $1.72 | $94.22 | $0.38 | $1.38 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +2.1% | +1.0% | +0.6% | 0.0% | +2.3% |
GRFS leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). TAK leads in 1 (Risk & Volatility). 4 tied.
GRFS vs OCSL vs TAK vs ARCC vs GBDC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is GRFS or OCSL or TAK or ARCC or GBDC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Oaktree Specialty Lending Corporation (OCSL) is the stronger pick with 60.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 0. 2% for Grifols, S. A. (GRFS). Golub Capital BDC, Inc. (GBDC) offers the better valuation at 9. 3x trailing P/E (9. 2x forward), 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 OCSL or TAK or ARCC or GBDC?
On trailing P/E, Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
(GBDC) is the cheapest at 9. 3x versus Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited at 77. 4x. On forward P/E, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited is actually cheaper at 0. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited wins at 0. 01x versus Ares Capital Corporation's 0. 96x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — GRFS or OCSL or TAK or ARCC or GBDC?
Over the past 5 years, Ares Capital Corporation (ARCC) delivered a total return of +47.
0%, compared to -52. 8% for Grifols, S. A. (GRFS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ARCC returned +139. 2% versus GRFS's -35. 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 OCSL or TAK or ARCC or GBDC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited (TAK) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
33β versus Grifols, S. A. 's 1. 12β — meaning GRFS is approximately 245% more volatile than TAK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited (TAK) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 65% versus 123% for Golub Capital BDC, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — GRFS or OCSL or TAK or ARCC or GBDC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Oaktree Specialty Lending Corporation (OCSL) is pulling ahead at 60.
9% versus 0. 2% for Grifols, S. A. (GRFS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Grifols, S. A. grew EPS 147. 8% year-over-year, compared to -45. 8% for Oaktree Specialty Lending Corporation. Over a 3-year CAGR, TAK leads at 8. 7% 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 OCSL or TAK or ARCC or GBDC?
Golub Capital BDC, Inc.
(GBDC) is the more profitable company, earning 43. 2% net margin versus 2. 4% for Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited — meaning it keeps 43. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GBDC leads at 78. 9% versus 7. 5% for TAK. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — OCSL leads at 87. 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 GRFS or OCSL or TAK or ARCC or GBDC more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited (TAK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 01x versus Ares Capital Corporation's 0. 96x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited (TAK) trades at 0. 2x forward P/E versus 9. 9x for Ares Capital Corporation — 9. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ARCC: 15. 4% to $21. 88.
08Which pays a better dividend — GRFS or OCSL or TAK or ARCC or GBDC?
All stocks in this comparison pay dividends.
Oaktree Specialty Lending Corporation (OCSL) offers the highest yield at 14. 1%, versus 2. 0% for Ares Capital Corporation (ARCC).
09Is GRFS or OCSL or TAK or ARCC or GBDC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited (TAK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
33), 3. 6% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (TAK: -1. 4%, GRFS: -35. 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 OCSL and TAK and ARCC and GBDC?
These companies operate in different sectors (GRFS (Healthcare) and OCSL (Financial Services) and TAK (Healthcare) and ARCC (Financial Services) and GBDC (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: GRFS is a small-cap deep-value stock; OCSL is a small-cap high-growth stock; TAK is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; ARCC is a mid-cap high-growth stock; GBDC is a small-cap high-growth 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.