Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
IMVT vs RCUS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
IMVT vs RCUS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $5.66B | $2.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $236M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-464M | $-369M |
| Gross Margin | — | 90.7% |
| Operating Margin | — | -168.6% |
| Total Debt | $98K | $99M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $714M | $222M |
IMVT vs RCUS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 108.5 | +8.5% |
| Arcus Biosciences, … (RCUS) | 100 | 83.1 | -16.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IMVT vs RCUS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- beta 1.37
- 179.8% 10Y total return vs RCUS's 53.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.37, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 11.16x
RCUS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth -4.3%, EPS growth -4.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 30.2%
- -4.3% revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3%
- +191.5% vs IMVT's +82.9%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | -4.3% revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3% | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.2% margin vs RCUS's -156.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.37 vs RCUS's 1.95, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | Neither stock pays a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +191.5% vs IMVT's +82.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -35.3% ROA vs IMVT's -44.1% |
IMVT vs RCUS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
IMVT vs RCUS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IMVT leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RCUS and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $236M and $0 in trailing revenue.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $236M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$487M | -$391M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$464M | -$369M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$423M | -$489M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +90.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -168.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -156.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -2.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -39.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +19.7% | +10.5% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — IMVT and RCUS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5.7B | $2.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.9B | $2.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -10.20x | -7.92x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 10.62x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 5.96x | 4.44x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
IMVT leads this category, winning 5 of 7 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
IMVT delivers a -47.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-47 in annual profit, vs $-69 for RCUS. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to RCUS's 0.16x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IMVT scores 2/9 vs RCUS's 0/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -47.1% | -69.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -44.1% | -35.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -64.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -66.1% | -42.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 0 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.16x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$714M | -$123M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $714M | $222M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $98,000 | $99M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -13.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
IMVT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IMVT five years ago would be worth $16,976 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,423 for RCUS. Over the past 12 months, RCUS leads with a +191.5% total return vs IMVT's +82.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IMVT at 13.2% vs RCUS's 10.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +7.4% | +11.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +82.9% | +191.5% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +45.0% | +33.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +69.8% | -15.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +179.8% | +53.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +13.2% | +10.0% |
Risk & Volatility
IMVT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IMVT is the less volatile stock with a 1.37 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RCUS's 1.95 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.37x | 1.95x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $30.09 | $28.72 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $13.36 | $7.06 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +92.5% | +90.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.8 | 60.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.4M | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates IMVT as "Buy" and RCUS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 63.4% upside for IMVT (target: $46) vs 15.1% for RCUS (target: $30).
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $45.50 | $30.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 23 | 18 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% |
IMVT leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Profitability & Efficiency. 1 category is tied.
IMVT vs RCUS: Frequently Asked Questions
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IMVT or RCUS a better buy right now?
Analysts rate Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) a "Buy" — based on 23 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 — IMVT or RCUS?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +69. 8%, compared to -15. 8% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +179. 8% versus RCUS's +53. 3%. 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 — IMVT or RCUS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 37β versus Arcus Biosciences, Inc. 's 1. 95β — meaning RCUS is approximately 42% more volatile than IMVT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 16% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — IMVT or RCUS?
On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Arcus Biosciences, Inc.
grew EPS -4. 8% year-over-year, compared to -45. 2% for Immunovant, Inc.. 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 — IMVT or RCUS?
Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -142. 9% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IMVT leads at 0. 0% versus -156. 3% for RCUS. 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — IMVT 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.
07Is IMVT or RCUS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+179. 8% 10Y return). Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) carries a higher beta of 1. 95 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (IMVT: +179. 8%, RCUS: +53. 3%), 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.
08What are the main differences between IMVT 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.
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 both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.