Medical - Care Facilities
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
HCSG vs DBVT vs ALKS vs AMSF vs PRGO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Insurance - Specialty
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
HCSG vs DBVT vs ALKS vs AMSF vs PRGO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Care Facilities | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Insurance - Specialty | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic |
| Market Cap | $1.60B | $1712.35T | $5.90B | $569M | $1.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.84B | $0.00 | $1.56B | $325M | $4.18B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $59M | $-168M | $153M | $46M | $-1.82B |
| Gross Margin | 13.3% | — | 65.4% | 47.6% | 34.2% |
| Operating Margin | 3.0% | — | 12.3% | 17.8% | -4.1% |
| Forward P/E | 20.8x | — | 24.8x | 14.4x | 5.6x |
| Total Debt | $25M | $22M | $70M | $491K | $3.97B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $161M | $194M | $1.12B | $62M | $532M |
HCSG vs DBVT vs ALKS vs AMSF vs PRGO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Healthcare Services… (HCSG) | 100 | 93.3 | -6.7% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 41.2 | -58.8% |
| Alkermes plc (ALKS) | 100 | 216.4 | +116.4% |
| AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) | 100 | 49.4 | -50.6% |
| Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) | 100 | 21.4 | -78.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HCSG vs DBVT vs ALKS vs AMSF vs PRGO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HCSG has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 7.1%, EPS growth 52.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 2.8%
- 7.1% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0%
- 7.3% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0%
DBVT is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +110.4% vs PRGO's -51.2%
ALKS is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.06, Low D/E 3.8%, current ratio 3.55x
AMSF is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and defensive is your priority.
- 31.8% 10Y total return vs ALKS's -11.0%
- Beta 0.23, yield 8.4%, current ratio 0.32x
- 14.3% margin vs PRGO's -43.5%
- Beta 0.23 vs DBVT's 1.26, lower leverage
PRGO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 1.18, yield 9.8%
- Lower P/E (5.6x vs 14.4x)
- 9.8% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs AMSF's 8.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 7.1% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (5.6x vs 14.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 14.3% margin vs PRGO's -43.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.23 vs DBVT's 1.26, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 9.8% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs AMSF's 8.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +110.4% vs PRGO's -51.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 7.3% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0% |
HCSG vs DBVT vs ALKS vs AMSF vs PRGO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
HCSG vs DBVT vs ALKS vs AMSF vs PRGO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ALKS leads in 1 of 6 categories
PRGO leads 1 • AMSF leads 1 • HCSG leads 1 • DBVT leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ALKS leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PRGO and DBVT operate at a comparable scale, with $4.2B and $0 in trailing revenue. AMSF is the more profitable business, keeping 14.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PRGO's -43.5%. On growth, ALKS holds the edge at +28.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.8B | $0 | $1.6B | $325M | $4.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $72M | -$112M | $212M | $58M | $58M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $59M | -$168M | $153M | $46M | -$1.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $139M | -$151M | $392M | $8M | $108M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +13.3% | — | +65.4% | +47.6% | +34.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +3.0% | — | +12.3% | +17.8% | -4.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +3.2% | — | +9.8% | +14.3% | -43.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +7.6% | — | +25.1% | +2.5% | +2.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.6% | — | +28.2% | +10.3% | -7.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +175.0% | +91.5% | -4.1% | -8.5% | -56.4% |
Valuation Metrics
PRGO leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 12.3x trailing earnings, AMSF trades at a 55% valuation discount to HCSG's 27.5x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, PRGO's 7.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than HCSG's 22.4x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.6B | $1712.35T | $5.9B | $569M | $1.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.5B | $1712.35T | $4.9B | $508M | $5.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 27.54x | -0.76x | 24.76x | 12.27x | -1.14x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 20.83x | — | — | 14.42x | 5.56x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 22.38x | — | 17.25x | 8.53x | 7.42x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.87x | — | 4.00x | 1.80x | 0.38x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.19x | 0.66x | 3.28x | 2.30x | 0.55x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 11.49x | — | 12.28x | 63.83x | 11.12x |
Profitability & Efficiency
AMSF leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HCSG delivers a 11.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $12 in annual profit, vs $-130 for DBVT. AMSF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PRGO's 1.35x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HCSG scores 7/9 vs PRGO's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +11.8% | -130.2% | +8.8% | +9.7% | -50.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +7.3% | -89.0% | +5.4% | +5.6% | -19.8% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.0% | — | +18.9% | +21.9% | +3.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +7.7% | -145.7% | +14.2% | +16.8% | +4.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.05x | 0.13x | 0.04x | 0.00x | 1.35x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$136M | -$172M | -$1.0B | -$61M | $3.4B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $161M | $194M | $1.1B | $62M | $532M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $25M | $22M | $70M | $491,000 | $4.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 33.02x | -189.82x | 32.30x | — | -7.20x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HCSG leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ALKS five years ago would be worth $16,091 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,090 for DBVT. Over the past 12 months, DBVT leads with a +110.4% total return vs PRGO's -51.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HCSG at 14.1% vs PRGO's -25.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +28.6% | +4.9% | +25.3% | -18.3% | -13.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +55.8% | +110.4% | +16.5% | -29.2% | -51.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +48.6% | +19.7% | +14.5% | -24.8% | -58.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -21.1% | -69.1% | +60.9% | -18.9% | -60.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -26.8% | -87.0% | -11.0% | +31.8% | -77.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +14.1% | +6.2% | +4.6% | -9.1% | -25.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ALKS and AMSF each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
AMSF is the less volatile stock with a 0.23 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than DBVT's 1.26 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 PRGO's 41.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.12x | 1.26x | 1.06x | 0.23x | 1.18x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $24.39 | $26.18 | $36.60 | $48.54 | $28.44 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $12.66 | $7.53 | $25.17 | $29.42 | $9.23 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +91.5% | +76.3% | +96.7% | +62.4% | +41.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.8 | 48.1 | 60.2 | 34.2 | 60.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 676K | 252K | 2.3M | 212K | 3.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — HCSG and PRGO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HCSG as "Hold", DBVT as "Buy", ALKS as "Buy", AMSF as "Buy", PRGO as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 131.8% upside for DBVT (target: $46) vs 9.8% for HCSG (target: $25). For income investors, PRGO offers the higher dividend yield at 9.81% vs AMSF's 8.41%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $24.50 | $46.33 | $44.00 | $44.50 | $20.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 15 | 15 | 28 | 6 | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +8.4% | +9.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $2.55 | $1.15 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +3.9% | 0.0% | +0.5% | +2.1% | 0.0% |
ALKS leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). PRGO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
HCSG vs DBVT vs ALKS vs AMSF vs PRGO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HCSG or DBVT or ALKS or AMSF or PRGO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Healthcare Services Group, Inc.
(HCSG) is the stronger pick with 7. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 2% for Alkermes plc (ALKS). AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) offers the better valuation at 12. 3x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT) a "Buy" — based on 15 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 — HCSG or DBVT or ALKS or AMSF or PRGO?
On trailing P/E, AMERISAFE, Inc.
(AMSF) is the cheapest at 12. 3x versus Healthcare Services Group, Inc. at 27. 5x. On forward P/E, Perrigo Company plc is actually cheaper at 5. 6x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — HCSG or DBVT or ALKS or AMSF or PRGO?
Over the past 5 years, Alkermes plc (ALKS) delivered a total return of +60.
9%, compared to -69. 1% for DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: AMSF returned +31. 8% 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 — HCSG or DBVT or ALKS or AMSF or PRGO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AMERISAFE, Inc.
(AMSF) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 23β versus DBV Technologies S. A. 's 1. 26β — meaning DBVT is approximately 444% more volatile than AMSF relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, AMERISAFE, Inc. (AMSF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 135% for Perrigo Company plc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — HCSG or DBVT or ALKS or AMSF or PRGO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Healthcare Services Group, Inc.
(HCSG) is pulling ahead at 7. 1% versus -5. 2% for Alkermes plc (ALKS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Healthcare Services Group, Inc. grew EPS 52. 8% year-over-year, compared to -723. 2% for Perrigo Company plc. 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 — HCSG or DBVT or ALKS or AMSF or PRGO?
Alkermes plc (ALKS) is the more profitable company, earning 16.
4% net margin versus -33. 5% for Perrigo Company plc — meaning it keeps 16. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: AMSF leads at 18. 6% 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 HCSG or DBVT or ALKS or AMSF or PRGO more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) trades at 5.
6x forward P/E versus 20. 8x for Healthcare Services Group, Inc. — 15. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DBVT: 131. 8% to $46. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — HCSG or DBVT or ALKS or AMSF or PRGO?
In this comparison, PRGO (9.
8% yield), AMSF (8. 4% yield) pay a dividend. HCSG, DBVT, ALKS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is HCSG or DBVT or ALKS or AMSF or PRGO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, AMERISAFE, Inc.
(AMSF) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 23), 8. 4% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (AMSF: +31. 8%, DBVT: -87. 0%), 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 HCSG and DBVT and ALKS and AMSF and PRGO?
These companies operate in different sectors (HCSG (Healthcare) and DBVT (Healthcare) and ALKS (Healthcare) and AMSF (Financial Services) and PRGO (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: HCSG is a small-cap quality compounder stock; DBVT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; ALKS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AMSF is a small-cap deep-value stock; PRGO is a small-cap income-oriented stock. AMSF, PRGO pay a dividend while HCSG, 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.