Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
IMRN vs HALO vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
IMRN vs HALO vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $7M | $7.55B | $356.49B | $146.02B | $275.10B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $11M | $1.40B | $61.16B | $63.31B | $64.93B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-8M | $317M | $4.23B | $7.49B | $18.25B |
| Gross Margin | 65.4% | 81.9% | 70.2% | 69.3% | 74.2% |
| Operating Margin | -73.7% | 58.4% | 26.7% | 23.4% | 41.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 8.0x | 14.2x | 8.7x | 21.7x |
| Total Debt | $117K | $0.00 | $69.07B | $67.42B | $50.53B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $3M | $134M | $5.23B | $1.14B | $14.56B |
IMRN vs HALO vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immuron Limited (IMRN) | 100 | 39.6 | -60.4% |
| Halozyme Therapeuti… (HALO) | 100 | 264.2 | +164.2% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 217.5 | +117.5% |
| Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | 100 | 70.9 | -29.1% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 144.7 | +44.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IMRN vs HALO vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
IMRN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 48.6%, EPS growth 26.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 112.0%
- 48.6% revenue growth vs PFE's -1.6%
HALO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.35 vs MRK's 1.02
- Lower P/E (8.0x vs 21.7x), PEG 0.35 vs 1.02
ABBV is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 293.8% 10Y total return vs HALO's 5.6%
- Beta 0.28 vs IMRN's 0.80
PFE is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.49, yield 6.7%
- Beta 0.49, yield 6.7%, current ratio 1.16x
- 6.7% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ABBV's 3.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
MRK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.45, Low D/E 96.0%, current ratio 1.54x
- 28.1% margin vs IMRN's -71.9%
- +47.7% vs IMRN's -56.9%
- 14.6% ROA vs IMRN's -77.9%, ROIC 22.0% vs -122.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 48.6% revenue growth vs PFE's -1.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.0x vs 21.7x), PEG 0.35 vs 1.02 | |
| Quality / Margins | 28.1% margin vs IMRN's -71.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.28 vs IMRN's 0.80 | |
| Dividends | 6.7% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ABBV's 3.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +47.7% vs IMRN's -56.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.6% ROA vs IMRN's -77.9%, ROIC 22.0% vs -122.5% |
IMRN vs HALO vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
IMRN vs HALO vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HALO leads in 3 of 6 categories
PFE leads 1 • IMRN leads 0 • ABBV leads 0 • MRK leads 0 • 2 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)
MRK is the larger business by revenue, generating $64.9B annually — 5939.9x IMRN's $11M. MRK is the more profitable business, keeping 28.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to IMRN's -71.9%. On growth, HALO holds the edge at +51.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $11M | $1.4B | $61.2B | $63.3B | $64.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$8M | $945M | $24.5B | $21.0B | $32.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$8M | $317M | $4.2B | $7.5B | $18.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$9M | $645M | $18.7B | $9.5B | $12.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +65.4% | +81.9% | +70.2% | +69.3% | +74.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -73.7% | +58.4% | +26.7% | +23.4% | +41.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -71.9% | +22.7% | +6.9% | +11.8% | +28.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -84.2% | +46.2% | +30.6% | +15.0% | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +29.3% | +51.6% | +10.0% | +5.4% | +4.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +45.3% | -2.1% | +57.4% | -9.5% | -19.6% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — IMRN and HALO each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.3x trailing earnings, MRK trades at a 82% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MRK offers better value at 0.72x vs HALO's 1.09x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $7M | $7.6B | $356.5B | $146.0B | $275.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $5M | $7.4B | $420.3B | $212.3B | $311.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.29x | 25.05x | 85.04x | 18.88x | 15.30x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 7.96x | 14.17x | 8.66x | 21.69x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.09x | — | — | 0.72x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 8.20x | 14.89x | 10.44x | 10.61x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.29x | 5.41x | 5.83x | 2.33x | 4.24x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.84x | 162.76x | — | 1.68x | 5.30x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 11.72x | 20.01x | 16.09x | 22.26x |
Profitability & Efficiency
HALO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ABBV delivers a 62.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $62 in annual profit, vs $-98 for IMRN. IMRN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MRK's 0.96x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PFE scores 7/9 vs IMRN's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -97.9% | +6.5% | +62.1% | +8.3% | +36.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -77.9% | +12.5% | +3.1% | +3.6% | +14.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -122.5% | +73.4% | +23.9% | +7.5% | +22.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -51.0% | +38.2% | +21.5% | +9.0% | +23.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | — | — | 0.78x | 0.96x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$3M | -$134M | $63.8B | $66.3B | $36.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $3M | $134M | $5.2B | $1.1B | $14.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $117,127 | $0 | $69.1B | $67.4B | $50.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -731.63x | 46.08x | 3.28x | 4.02x | 19.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HALO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABBV five years ago would be worth $19,956 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,640 for IMRN. Over the past 12 months, MRK leads with a +47.7% total return vs IMRN's -56.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HALO at 28.4% vs IMRN's -32.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +5.6% | -8.8% | -10.6% | +5.4% | +5.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -56.9% | -5.3% | +12.2% | +21.1% | +47.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -68.7% | +111.8% | +49.7% | -19.4% | +2.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -83.6% | +39.1% | +99.6% | -14.8% | +69.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -90.0% | +559.7% | +293.8% | +28.5% | +164.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -32.1% | +28.4% | +14.4% | -6.9% | +0.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ABBV and PFE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABBV is the less volatile stock with a 0.28 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than IMRN's 0.80 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PFE currently trades 89.3% from its 52-week high vs IMRN's 35.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.80x | 0.51x | 0.28x | 0.49x | 0.45x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.39 | $82.22 | $244.81 | $28.75 | $125.14 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.68 | $47.50 | $176.57 | $21.97 | $73.31 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +35.1% | +78.0% | +82.3% | +89.3% | +89.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 50.2 | 47.7 | 43.9 | 43.9 | 43.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 26K | 1.4M | 5.8M | 33.3M | 7.2M |
Analyst Outlook
PFE leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: HALO as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", PFE as "Hold", MRK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 27.4% upside for ABBV (target: $257) vs 6.7% for PFE (target: $27). For income investors, PFE offers the higher dividend yield at 6.69% vs MRK's 2.93%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $75.60 | $256.69 | $27.40 | $129.31 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 27 | 41 | 39 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +3.3% | +6.7% | +2.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 13 | 15 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $6.57 | $1.72 | $3.26 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +4.5% | +0.3% | 0.0% | +1.8% |
HALO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). PFE leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 2 tied.
IMRN vs HALO vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IMRN or HALO or ABBV or PFE or MRK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Immuron Limited (IMRN) is the stronger pick with 48.
6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) offers the better valuation at 15. 3x trailing P/E (21. 7x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO) a "Buy" — based on 27 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 — IMRN or HALO or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
On trailing P/E, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the cheapest at 15. 3x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 0x. On forward P/E, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 0x — 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: Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. wins at 0. 35x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 02x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — IMRN or HALO or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
Over the past 5 years, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) delivered a total return of +99. 6%, compared to -83. 6% for Immuron Limited (IMRN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HALO returned +559. 7% versus IMRN's -90. 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 — IMRN or HALO or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 28β versus Immuron Limited's 0. 80β — meaning IMRN is approximately 189% more volatile than ABBV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immuron Limited (IMRN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 96% for Merck & Co. , Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — IMRN or HALO or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Immuron Limited (IMRN) is pulling ahead at 48.
6% versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Immuron Limited grew EPS 26. 2% year-over-year, compared to -25. 4% for Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, IMRN leads at 112. 0% 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 — IMRN or HALO or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the more profitable company, earning 28. 1% net margin versus -71. 6% for Immuron Limited — meaning it keeps 28. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HALO leads at 58. 4% versus -73. 3% for IMRN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HALO leads at 78. 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.
07Is IMRN or HALO or ABBV or PFE or MRK 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, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 02x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO) trades at 8. 0x forward P/E versus 21. 7x for Merck & Co. , Inc. — 13. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ABBV: 27. 4% to $256. 69.
08Which pays a better dividend — IMRN or HALO or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
In this comparison, PFE (6.
7% yield), ABBV (3. 3% yield), MRK (2. 9% yield) pay a dividend. IMRN, HALO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is IMRN or HALO or ABBV or PFE or MRK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 28), 3. 3% yield, +293. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABBV: +293. 8%, IMRN: -90. 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 IMRN and HALO and ABBV and PFE and MRK?
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: IMRN is a small-cap high-growth stock; HALO is a small-cap high-growth stock; ABBV is a large-cap income-oriented stock; PFE is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock. ABBV, PFE, MRK pay a dividend while IMRN, 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.