Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
HROW vs NUVL vs IMVT vs RXRX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
HROW vs NUVL vs IMVT vs RXRX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $1.45B | $7.53B | $5.53B | $1.46B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $272M | $0.00 | $0.00 | $66M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-5M | $-450M | $-464M | $-560M |
| Gross Margin | 75.1% | — | — | -34.4% |
| Operating Margin | 11.2% | — | — | -8.8% |
| Forward P/E | 82.9x | — | — | — |
| Total Debt | $252M | $0.00 | $98K | $78M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $73M | $262M | $714M | $743M |
HROW vs NUVL vs IMVT vs RXRX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Harrow Health, Inc. (HROW) | 100 | 437.8 | +337.8% |
| Nuvalent, Inc. (NUVL) | 100 | 561.1 | +461.1% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 260.2 | +160.2% |
| Recursion Pharmaceu… (RXRX) | 100 | 10.8 | -89.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: HROW vs NUVL vs IMVT vs RXRX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
HROW carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 36.4%, EPS growth 71.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 45.4%
- 9.1% 10Y total return vs NUVL's 446.1%
- 36.4% revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3%
- -1.4% ROA vs IMVT's -44.1%
NUVL is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- beta 1.09
- Beta 1.09, current ratio 15.27x
- Beta 1.09 vs RXRX's 3.18
IMVT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.37, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 11.16x
- 3.2% margin vs RXRX's -8.4%
- +96.1% vs RXRX's -22.0%
RXRX lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 36.4% revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3% | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.2% margin vs RXRX's -8.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.09 vs RXRX's 3.18 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +96.1% vs RXRX's -22.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -1.4% ROA vs IMVT's -44.1% |
HROW vs NUVL vs IMVT vs RXRX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
HROW vs NUVL vs IMVT vs RXRX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HROW leads in 3 of 6 categories
NUVL leads 2 • IMVT leads 0 • RXRX leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HROW leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HROW and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $272M and $0 in trailing revenue. HROW is the more profitable business, keeping -1.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RXRX's -8.4%. On growth, HROW holds the edge at +33.3% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $272M | $0 | $0 | $66M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $59M | -$346M | -$487M | -$521M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$5M | -$450M | -$464M | -$560M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $73M | -$313M | -$423M | -$326M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +75.1% | — | — | -34.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.2% | — | — | -8.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -1.9% | — | — | -8.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +26.8% | — | — | -4.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +33.3% | — | — | -56.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -5.3% | -17.8% | +19.7% | +56.0% |
Valuation Metrics
HROW leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.5B | $7.5B | $5.5B | $1.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.6B | $7.3B | $4.8B | $797M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -278.93x | -17.50x | -9.97x | -2.27x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 82.86x | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 5.34x | — | — | 19.58x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 27.56x | 5.96x | 5.83x | 1.29x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
HROW leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HROW delivers a -10.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-10 in annual profit, vs $-54 for RXRX. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HROW's 4.84x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HROW scores 4/9 vs NUVL's 1/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -10.1% | -42.8% | -47.1% | -54.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -1.4% | -37.8% | -44.1% | -40.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.5% | -32.5% | — | -95.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +10.2% | -34.4% | -66.1% | -50.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 4.84x | — | 0.00x | 0.07x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $179M | -$262M | -$714M | -$665M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $73M | $262M | $714M | $743M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $252M | $0 | $98,000 | $78M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.53x | -26.85x | — | -336.46x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NUVL leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NUVL five years ago would be worth $54,613 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,179 for RXRX. Over the past 12 months, IMVT leads with a +96.1% total return vs RXRX's -22.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NUVL at 39.5% vs RXRX's -16.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -21.8% | +1.5% | +5.1% | -22.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +58.8% | +53.5% | +96.1% | -22.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +43.0% | +171.2% | +40.9% | -41.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +378.0% | +446.1% | +62.4% | -88.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +914.3% | +446.1% | +173.6% | -81.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +12.7% | +39.5% | +12.1% | -16.4% |
Risk & Volatility
NUVL leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
NUVL is the less volatile stock with a 1.09 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RXRX's 3.18 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NUVL currently trades 90.6% from its 52-week high vs RXRX's 45.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.13x | 1.09x | 1.37x | 3.18x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $54.85 | $113.02 | $30.09 | $7.18 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $21.12 | $63.56 | $13.36 | $2.80 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +71.2% | +90.6% | +90.5% | +45.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 54.6 | 52.9 | 60.2 | 49.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 733K | 544K | 1.4M | 12.5M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HROW as "Buy", NUVL as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", RXRX as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 236.4% upside for RXRX (target: $11) vs 41.0% for NUVL (target: $144).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $75.67 | $144.40 | $45.50 | $11.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 14 | 23 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
HROW leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). NUVL leads in 2 (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility).
HROW vs NUVL vs IMVT vs RXRX: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is HROW or NUVL or IMVT or RXRX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Harrow Health, Inc.
(HROW) is the stronger pick with 36. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 26. 9% for Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (RXRX). Analysts rate Harrow Health, Inc. (HROW) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — HROW or NUVL or IMVT or RXRX?
Over the past 5 years, Nuvalent, Inc.
(NUVL) delivered a total return of +446. 1%, compared to -88. 2% for Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (RXRX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HROW returned +914. 3% versus RXRX's -81. 8%. 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 — HROW or NUVL or IMVT or RXRX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Nuvalent, Inc.
(NUVL) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 09β versus Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 3. 18β — meaning RXRX is approximately 191% more volatile than NUVL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 5% for Harrow Health, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — HROW or NUVL or IMVT or RXRX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Harrow Health, Inc.
(HROW) is pulling ahead at 36. 4% versus 26. 9% for Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (RXRX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Harrow Health, Inc. grew EPS 71. 4% year-over-year, compared to -48. 9% for Nuvalent, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, HROW leads at 45. 4% 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 — HROW or NUVL or IMVT or RXRX?
Nuvalent, Inc.
(NUVL) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -863. 4% for Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HROW leads at 11. 2% versus -867. 9% for RXRX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HROW leads at 75. 1%, 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 HROW or NUVL or IMVT or RXRX more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for RXRX: 236.
4% to $11. 00.
07Which pays a better dividend — HROW or NUVL or IMVT or RXRX?
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 HROW or NUVL or IMVT or RXRX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Nuvalent, Inc.
(NUVL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 09), +446. 1% 10Y return). Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (RXRX) carries a higher beta of 3. 18 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (NUVL: +446. 1%, RXRX: -81. 8%), 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 HROW and NUVL and IMVT and RXRX?
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: HROW is a small-cap high-growth stock; NUVL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; RXRX 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.