Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
IMA vs ARQT vs KO vs JPM vs BAC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
Banks - Diversified
Banks - Diversified
IMA vs ARQT vs KO vs JPM vs BAC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic | Banks - Diversified | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $61M | $3.05B | $355.61B | $896.00B | $422.78B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $416M | $49.28B | $280.33B | $191.57B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-45M | $-2M | $13.70B | $57.05B | $30.51B |
| Gross Margin | -29.1% | 90.9% | 61.7% | 60.0% | 56.1% |
| Operating Margin | -60.6% | 0.8% | 29.3% | 25.9% | 19.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | 122.5x | 25.3x | 14.4x | 12.6x |
| Total Debt | $10M | $6M | $45.49B | $942.38B | $365.90B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $35M | $43M | $10.27B | $343.34B | $231.84B |
IMA vs ARQT vs KO vs JPM vs BAC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| ImageneBio Inc (IMA) | 100 | 1.6 | -98.4% |
| Arcutis Biotherapeu… (ARQT) | 100 | 84.3 | -15.7% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 156.7 | +56.7% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 210.7 | +110.7% |
| Bank of America Cor… (BAC) | 100 | 144.8 | +44.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IMA vs ARQT vs KO vs JPM vs BAC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
IMA ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.83, Low D/E 7.5%, current ratio 12.49x
- Beta 0.83, current ratio 12.49x
- Beta 0.83 vs ARQT's 1.45
ARQT is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 91.3%, EPS growth 88.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 367.3%
- 91.3% revenue growth vs IMA's -77.1%
- +80.6% vs IMA's -67.0%
KO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 56 yrs, beta -0.20, yield 2.5%
- 27.8% margin vs IMA's -56.7%
- 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
- 13.1% ROA vs IMA's -31.3%, ROIC 15.8% vs -35.9%
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs BAC's 368.2%
- PEG 0.81 vs KO's 2.26
- NIM 2.2% vs BAC's 1.8%
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.26
Among these 5 stocks, BAC doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 91.3% revenue growth vs IMA's -77.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 25.3x), PEG 0.81 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs IMA's -56.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.83 vs ARQT's 1.45 | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield, 56-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +80.6% vs IMA's -67.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs IMA's -31.3%, ROIC 15.8% vs -35.9% |
IMA vs ARQT vs KO vs JPM vs BAC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
IMA vs ARQT vs KO vs JPM vs BAC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories
ARQT leads 2 • BAC leads 1 • IMA leads 0 • JPM leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ARQT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM and IMA operate at a comparable scale, with $280.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to IMA's -56.7%. On growth, ARQT holds the edge at +60.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $416M | $49.3B | $280.3B | $191.6B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$53M | $6M | $15.5B | $81.4B | $40.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$45M | -$2M | $13.7B | $57.0B | $30.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$52M | $27M | $12.6B | $100.9B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -29.1% | +90.9% | +61.7% | +60.0% | +56.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -60.6% | +0.8% | +29.3% | +25.9% | +19.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -56.7% | -0.6% | +27.8% | +20.4% | +15.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -59.8% | +6.5% | +25.5% | +36.0% | +6.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +60.1% | +12.1% | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.3% | +55.0% | +18.2% | +16.0% | +18.3% |
Valuation Metrics
BAC leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.7x trailing earnings, BAC trades at a 46% valuation discount to KO's 27.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs KO's 2.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $61M | $3.0B | $355.6B | $896.0B | $422.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $36M | $3.0B | $390.8B | $1.50T | $556.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.50x | -187.54x | 27.18x | 16.00x | 14.66x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 122.45x | 25.27x | 14.40x | 12.56x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.43x | 0.90x | 0.95x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 26.39x | 18.36x | 13.92x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 76.54x | 8.11x | 7.42x | 3.20x | 2.21x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.20x | 16.37x | 10.40x | 2.47x | 1.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 67.15x | 8.88x | 33.52x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $-35 for IMA. ARQT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs IMA's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -35.2% | -1.4% | +41.1% | +15.9% | +10.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -31.3% | -0.6% | +13.1% | +1.3% | +0.9% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -35.9% | -5.2% | +15.8% | +4.5% | +3.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -35.6% | -4.3% | +17.3% | +8.9% | +4.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.08x | 0.03x | 1.33x | 2.60x | 1.21x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$25M | -$37M | $35.2B | $599.0B | $134.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $35M | $43M | $10.3B | $343.3B | $231.8B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $10M | $6M | $45.5B | $942.4B | $365.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -560.22x | 2.08x | 10.70x | 0.74x | 0.48x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ARQT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $330 for IMA. Over the past 12 months, ARQT leads with a +80.6% total return vs IMA's -67.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ARQT at 33.7% vs IMA's -59.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.7% | -15.9% | +20.3% | -0.5% | +1.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -67.0% | +80.6% | +17.2% | +21.8% | +28.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.3% | +138.8% | +47.0% | +138.2% | +103.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -96.7% | -16.2% | +65.6% | +118.2% | +47.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.6% | +11.8% | +121.1% | +465.8% | +368.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -59.4% | +33.7% | +13.7% | +33.6% | +26.6% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ARQT's 1.45 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs IMA's 30.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.83x | 1.45x | -0.20x | 0.94x | 0.86x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $18.00 | $31.77 | $84.04 | $337.25 | $57.55 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.36 | $12.72 | $65.35 | $262.71 | $43.66 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +30.2% | +76.7% | +98.3% | +95.1% | +97.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.8 | 66.4 | 60.6 | 59.1 | 68.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 432K | 1.5M | 12.7M | 7.0M | 31.7M |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ARQT as "Buy", KO as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", BAC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 39.5% upside for ARQT (target: $34) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, KO offers the higher dividend yield at 2.46% vs JPM's 1.86%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $34.00 | $86.13 | $339.75 | $61.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 12 | 48 | 61 | 54 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.5% | +1.9% | +2.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 56 | 15 | 12 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.04 | $5.95 | $1.27 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +3.9% | +5.1% |
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Risk & Volatility). ARQT leads in 2 (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns).
IMA vs ARQT vs KO vs JPM vs BAC: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IMA or ARQT or KO or JPM or BAC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(ARQT) is the stronger pick with 91. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -77. 1% for ImageneBio Inc (IMA). Bank of America Corporation (BAC) offers the better valuation at 14. 7x trailing P/E (12. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. (ARQT) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — IMA or ARQT or KO or JPM or BAC?
On trailing P/E, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the cheapest at 14.
7x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 2x. On forward P/E, Bank of America Corporation is actually cheaper at 12. 6x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — IMA or ARQT or KO or JPM or BAC?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -96. 7% for ImageneBio Inc (IMA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus IMA's -98. 6%. 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 — IMA or ARQT or KO or JPM or BAC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. 's 1. 45β — meaning ARQT is approximately -823% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. (ARQT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — IMA or ARQT or KO or JPM or BAC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(ARQT) is pulling ahead at 91. 3% versus -77. 1% for ImageneBio Inc (IMA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. grew EPS 88. 8% year-over-year, compared to -954. 9% for ImageneBio Inc. Over a 3-year CAGR, ARQT leads at 367. 3% 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 — IMA or ARQT or KO or JPM or BAC?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -56. 7% for ImageneBio Inc — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus -60. 6% for IMA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ARQT leads at 90. 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 IMA or ARQT or KO or JPM or BAC 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) trades at 12. 6x forward P/E versus 122. 5x for Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. — 109. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ARQT: 39. 5% to $34. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — IMA or ARQT or KO or JPM or BAC?
In this comparison, KO (2.
5% yield), BAC (2. 3% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield) pay a dividend. IMA, ARQT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is IMA or ARQT or KO or JPM or BAC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, ARQT: +11. 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.
10What are the main differences between IMA and ARQT and KO and JPM and BAC?
These companies operate in different sectors (IMA (Healthcare) and ARQT (Healthcare) and KO (Consumer Defensive) and JPM (Financial Services) and BAC (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: IMA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ARQT is a small-cap high-growth stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; BAC is a large-cap deep-value stock. KO, JPM, BAC pay a dividend while IMA, ARQT 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.