Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
INAB vs FATE vs ADCT vs IMVT vs AGEN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
INAB vs FATE vs ADCT vs IMVT vs AGEN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $6M | $221M | $127M | $6.90B | $124M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $6M | $79M | $0.00 | $124M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-19M | $-130M | $-137M | $-506M | $65M |
| Gross Margin | — | 53.8% | 90.7% | — | 52.1% |
| Operating Margin | — | -22.1% | -149.6% | — | 6.6% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | — | 3.8x |
| Total Debt | $3M | $78M | $439M | $72K | $335M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $27M | $47M | $261M | $902M | $3M |
INAB vs FATE vs ADCT vs IMVT vs AGEN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| IN8bio, Inc. (INAB) | 100 | 0.5 | -99.5% |
| Fate Therapeutics, … (FATE) | 100 | 2.3 | -97.7% |
| ADC Therapeutics S.… (ADCT) | 100 | 4.7 | -95.3% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 321.3 | +221.3% |
| Agenus Inc. (AGEN) | 100 | 2.9 | -97.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: INAB vs FATE vs ADCT vs IMVT vs AGEN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
INAB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth.
- 32.1% revenue growth vs FATE's -51.2%
FATE lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
ADCT is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 14.9%, EPS growth 30.9%, 3Y rev CAGR -27.1%
IMVT carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- beta 1.66
- 237.8% 10Y total return vs FATE's 8.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.66, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 9.09x
- Beta 1.66, current ratio 9.09x
AGEN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 52.2% margin vs FATE's -20.6%
- 31.0% ROA vs INAB's -80.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 32.1% revenue growth vs FATE's -51.2% | |
| Quality / Margins | 52.2% margin vs FATE's -20.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.66 vs AGEN's 2.26 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +117.0% vs ADCT's -70.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 31.0% ROA vs INAB's -80.2% |
INAB vs FATE vs ADCT vs IMVT vs AGEN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
INAB vs FATE vs ADCT vs IMVT vs AGEN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AGEN leads in 2 of 6 categories
IMVT leads 2 • INAB leads 0 • FATE leads 0 • ADCT leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AGEN leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AGEN and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $124M and $0 in trailing revenue. AGEN is the more profitable business, keeping 52.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FATE's -20.6%. On growth, AGEN holds the edge at +40.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $6M | $79M | $0 | $124M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$17M | -$127M | -$117M | -$532M | $16M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$19M | -$130M | -$137M | -$506M | $65M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$15M | -$108M | -$115M | -$407M | -$88M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +53.8% | +90.7% | — | +52.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -22.1% | -149.6% | — | +6.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -20.6% | -173.0% | — | +52.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -17.1% | -144.7% | — | -70.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -20.3% | -9.5% | — | +40.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -2.9% | +18.8% | +41.7% | -14.1% | +199.0% |
Valuation Metrics
AGEN leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $6M | $221M | $127M | $6.9B | $124M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$18M | $253M | $304M | $6.0B | $456M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.31x | -1.65x | -0.89x | -12.13x | -876.47x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | 3.80x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 33.32x | 1.56x | — | 1.09x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.22x | 1.09x | — | 7.19x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — FATE and IMVT and AGEN each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
FATE delivers a -58.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-59 in annual profit, vs $-96 for INAB. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FATE's 0.38x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), INAB scores 5/9 vs IMVT's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -96.4% | -58.9% | — | -68.2% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -80.2% | -39.4% | -44.7% | -62.2% | +31.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.6% | -36.5% | — | — | — |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -84.5% | -43.1% | -43.8% | -68.3% | — |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.10x | 0.38x | — | 0.00x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$24M | $31M | $178M | -$902M | $332M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $27M | $47M | $261M | $902M | $3M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $3M | $78M | $439M | $72,000 | $335M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | -1.72x | — | 1.41x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
IMVT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IMVT five years ago would be worth $30,863 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $46 for INAB. Over the past 12 months, IMVT leads with a +117.0% total return vs ADCT's -70.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IMVT at 18.7% vs INAB's -71.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -43.9% | +91.9% | -71.7% | +29.7% | -7.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -37.6% | +53.2% | -70.5% | +117.0% | -42.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.6% | -65.9% | -56.5% | +67.3% | -91.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.5% | -97.7% | -95.7% | +208.6% | -97.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.5% | +8.0% | -96.6% | +237.8% | -96.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -71.3% | -30.2% | -24.2% | +18.7% | -56.2% |
Risk & Volatility
IMVT leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IMVT is the less volatile stock with a 1.66 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AGEN's 2.26 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IMVT currently trades 92.7% from its 52-week high vs ADCT's 20.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.89x | 1.93x | 1.84x | 1.66x | 2.26x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.73 | $2.88 | $4.97 | $36.27 | $7.34 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.17 | $0.91 | $0.78 | $14.32 | $2.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +50.5% | +66.0% | +20.0% | +92.7% | +40.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.9 | 48.9 | 14.8 | 59.4 | 45.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 62K | 3.2M | 1.8M | 1.9M | 884K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FATE as "Buy", ADCT as "Hold", IMVT as "Buy", AGEN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 251.3% upside for ADCT (target: $4) vs 29.9% for IMVT (target: $44).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $5.50 | $3.50 | $43.67 | $7.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 31 | 12 | 23 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% |
AGEN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). IMVT leads in 2 (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility). 1 tied.
INAB vs FATE vs ADCT vs IMVT vs AGEN: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is INAB or FATE or ADCT or IMVT or AGEN a better buy right now?
For growth investors, ADC Therapeutics S.
A. (ADCT) is the stronger pick with 14. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -51. 2% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Analysts rate Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE) a "Buy" — based on 31 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 — INAB or FATE or ADCT or IMVT or AGEN?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +208. 6%, compared to -99. 5% for IN8bio, Inc. (INAB). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +237. 8% versus INAB's -99. 5%. 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 — INAB or FATE or ADCT or IMVT or AGEN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 66β versus Agenus Inc. 's 2. 26β — meaning AGEN is approximately 36% 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 38% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — INAB or FATE or ADCT or IMVT or AGEN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ADC Therapeutics S.
A. (ADCT) is pulling ahead at 14. 9% versus -51. 2% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Agenus Inc. grew EPS 100. 0% year-over-year, compared to -678. 9% for IN8bio, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, AGEN leads at 5. 2% 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 — INAB or FATE or ADCT or IMVT or AGEN?
Agenus Inc.
(AGEN) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 1% net margin versus -20. 5% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 0. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INAB leads at 0. 0% versus -22. 2% for FATE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ADCT leads at 90. 6%, 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 INAB or FATE or ADCT or IMVT or AGEN more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ADCT: 251.
3% to $3. 50.
07Which pays a better dividend — INAB or FATE or ADCT or IMVT or AGEN?
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 INAB or FATE or ADCT or IMVT or AGEN 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 (+237. 8% 10Y return). Agenus Inc. (AGEN) carries a higher beta of 2. 26 — 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: +237. 8%, AGEN: -96. 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.
09What are the main differences between INAB and FATE and ADCT and IMVT and AGEN?
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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.