Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
IMRX vs PRTA vs ARQT vs RCUS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
IMRX vs PRTA vs ARQT vs RCUS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $152M | $432M | $3.05B | $2.40B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $58M | $416M | $236M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-54M | $-151M | $-2M | $-369M |
| Gross Margin | — | 46.8% | 90.9% | 90.7% |
| Operating Margin | — | -217.9% | 0.8% | -168.6% |
| Forward P/E | — | 176.7x | 122.5x | — |
| Total Debt | $4M | $14M | $6M | $99M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $129M | $308M | $43M | $222M |
IMRX vs PRTA vs ARQT vs RCUS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immuneering Corpora… (IMRX) | 100 | 23.8 | -76.2% |
| Prothena Corporatio… (PRTA) | 100 | 16.5 | -83.5% |
| Arcutis Biotherapeu… (ARQT) | 100 | 104.5 | +4.5% |
| Arcus Biosciences, … (RCUS) | 100 | 75.8 | -24.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IMRX vs PRTA vs ARQT vs RCUS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
IMRX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 1.33
- Lower volatility, beta 1.33, Low D/E 1.8%, current ratio 17.50x
- Beta 1.33, current ratio 17.50x
- 1.3% margin vs PRTA's -260.9%
PRTA lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
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 PRTA's -92.8%
- Better valuation composite
RCUS is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 40.0% 10Y total return vs ARQT's 11.8%
- +154.5% vs PRTA's +62.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 91.3% revenue growth vs PRTA's -92.8% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 1.3% margin vs PRTA's -260.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.33 vs RCUS's 2.00, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +154.5% vs PRTA's +62.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -0.1% ROA vs PRTA's -42.3%, ROIC -86.4% vs -21.0% |
IMRX vs PRTA vs ARQT vs RCUS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
IMRX vs PRTA vs ARQT vs RCUS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ARQT leads in 2 of 6 categories
IMRX leads 1 • RCUS leads 1 • PRTA leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ARQT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ARQT and IMRX operate at a comparable scale, with $416M and $0 in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from -0.6% (ARQT) to -2.6% (PRTA). On growth, PRTA holds the edge at +17.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $58M | $416M | $236M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$58M | -$124M | $6M | -$391M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$54M | -$151M | -$2M | -$369M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$50M | -$81M | $27M | -$489M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +46.8% | +90.9% | +90.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -2.2% | +0.8% | -168.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -2.6% | -0.6% | -156.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -140.6% | +6.5% | -2.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +17.1% | +60.1% | -39.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +50.0% | +153.6% | +55.0% | +10.5% |
Valuation Metrics
ARQT leads this category, winning 3 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $152M | $432M | $3.0B | $2.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $27M | $138M | $3.0B | $2.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -3.30x | -1.82x | -187.54x | -7.23x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 176.66x | 122.45x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 44.60x | 8.11x | 9.70x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.84x | 1.58x | 16.37x | 4.05x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
IMRX leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IMRX delivers a -0.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-0 in annual profit, vs $-69 for RCUS. IMRX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to RCUS's 0.16x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IMRX scores 4/9 vs RCUS's 0/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -0.1% | -49.9% | -1.4% | -69.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -0.1% | -42.3% | -0.6% | -35.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -86.4% | -21.0% | -5.2% | -64.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -44.5% | -47.0% | -4.3% | -42.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 0 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.05x | 0.03x | 0.16x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$125M | -$294M | -$37M | -$123M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $129M | $308M | $43M | $222M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $4M | $14M | $6M | $99M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | 2.08x | -13.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RCUS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RCUS five years ago would be worth $9,695 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,731 for PRTA. Over the past 12 months, RCUS leads with a +154.5% total return vs PRTA's +62.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ARQT at 33.7% vs PRTA's -51.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -36.7% | -10.3% | -15.9% | +2.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +113.8% | +62.7% | +80.6% | +154.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -57.6% | -88.7% | +138.8% | +18.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -76.2% | -82.7% | -16.2% | -3.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -76.2% | -82.0% | +11.8% | +40.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -24.9% | -51.7% | +33.7% | +5.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — IMRX and RCUS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IMRX is the less volatile stock with a 1.33 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RCUS's 2.00 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RCUS currently trades 82.9% from its 52-week high vs IMRX's 41.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.33x | 1.50x | 1.45x | 2.00x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $10.08 | $11.80 | $31.77 | $28.72 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.66 | $4.95 | $12.72 | $7.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +41.6% | +69.9% | +76.7% | +82.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 39.1 | 35.6 | 66.4 | 46.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.4M | 447K | 1.5M | 1.1M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: IMRX as "Buy", PRTA as "Buy", ARQT as "Buy", RCUS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 186.4% upside for IMRX (target: $12) vs 30.3% for RCUS (target: $31).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $12.00 | $19.00 | $34.00 | $31.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 11 | 28 | 12 | 18 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
ARQT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). IMRX leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 1 tied.
IMRX vs PRTA vs ARQT vs RCUS: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IMRX or PRTA or ARQT or RCUS 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 -92. 8% for Prothena Corporation plc (PRTA). Analysts rate Immuneering Corporation (IMRX) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — IMRX or PRTA or ARQT or RCUS?
Over the past 5 years, Arcus Biosciences, Inc.
(RCUS) delivered a total return of -3. 1%, compared to -82. 7% for Prothena Corporation plc (PRTA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RCUS returned +40. 0% versus PRTA's -82. 0%. 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 — IMRX or PRTA or ARQT or RCUS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Immuneering Corporation (IMRX) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
33β versus Arcus Biosciences, Inc. 's 2. 00β — meaning RCUS is approximately 51% more volatile than IMRX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immuneering Corporation (IMRX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 16% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — IMRX or PRTA or ARQT or RCUS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(ARQT) is pulling ahead at 91. 3% versus -92. 8% for Prothena Corporation plc (PRTA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. grew EPS 88. 8% year-over-year, compared to -99. 6% for Prothena Corporation plc. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — IMRX or PRTA or ARQT or RCUS?
Immuneering Corporation (IMRX) is the more profitable company, earning 0.
0% net margin versus -25. 2% for Prothena Corporation plc — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IMRX leads at 0. 0% versus -1905. 8% for PRTA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RCUS leads at 96. 0%, 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 IMRX or PRTA or ARQT or RCUS more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(ARQT) trades at 122. 5x forward P/E versus 176. 7x for Prothena Corporation plc — 54. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IMRX: 186. 4% to $12. 00.
07Which pays a better dividend — IMRX or PRTA or ARQT or RCUS?
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 IMRX or PRTA or ARQT or RCUS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Immuneering Corporation (IMRX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding.
Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) carries a higher beta of 2. 00 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (IMRX: -76. 2%, RCUS: +40. 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.
09What are the main differences between IMRX and PRTA and ARQT and RCUS?
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: IMRX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PRTA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ARQT is a small-cap high-growth stock; RCUS is a small-cap quality compounder 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.