Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
IVA vs CLDX vs NKTR vs ABBV vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Banks - Diversified
IVA vs CLDX vs NKTR vs ABBV vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $200M | $2.08B | $1.16B | $402.80B | $896.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $30M | $820K | $56M | $61.16B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-415M | $-284M | $-158M | $4.23B | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 92.5% | -4.1% | 99.4% | 70.2% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | -6.7% | -376.9% | -224.9% | 26.7% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 16.0x | 14.4x |
| Total Debt | $54M | $2M | $149M | $69.07B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $97M | $29M | $15M | $5.23B | $343.34B |
IVA vs CLDX vs NKTR vs ABBV vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inventiva S.A. (IVA) | 100 | 37.8 | -62.2% |
| Celldex Therapeutic… (CLDX) | 100 | 303.9 | +203.9% |
| Nektar Therapeutics (NKTR) | 100 | 17.9 | -82.1% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 239.9 | +139.9% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 331.9 | +231.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IVA vs CLDX vs NKTR vs ABBV vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
IVA lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
CLDX is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.54, Low D/E 0.4%, current ratio 10.49x
NKTR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +5.8% vs IVA's +13.6%
ABBV carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 43 yrs, beta 0.14, yield 2.9%
- Rev growth 8.6%, EPS growth -0.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 1.8%
- Beta 0.14, yield 2.9%, current ratio 0.67x
- 8.6% revenue growth vs CLDX's -78.6%
JPM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs ABBV's 362.2%
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 16.0x)
- 20.4% margin vs CLDX's -346.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.6% revenue growth vs CLDX's -78.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 16.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.4% margin vs CLDX's -346.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.14 vs IVA's 1.59 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, 43-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +5.8% vs IVA's +13.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 3.1% ROA vs IVA's -232.6% |
IVA vs CLDX vs NKTR vs ABBV vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
IVA vs CLDX vs NKTR vs ABBV vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ABBV leads in 2 of 6 categories
JPM leads 1 • NKTR leads 1 • IVA leads 0 • CLDX leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — ABBV and JPM each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 341869.5x CLDX's $820,000. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 20.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CLDX's -346.0%. On growth, IVA holds the edge at +62.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $30M | $820,000 | $56M | $61.2B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$195M | -$306M | -$124M | $24.5B | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$415M | -$284M | -$158M | $4.2B | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$177M | -$226M | -$204M | $18.7B | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +92.5% | -4.1% | +99.4% | +70.2% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.7% | -376.9% | -2.2% | +26.7% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -13.8% | -346.0% | -2.8% | +6.9% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.9% | -275.6% | -3.7% | +30.6% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +62.9% | -97.8% | +3.8% | +10.0% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -72.3% | -45.7% | +49.7% | +57.4% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.0x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 83% valuation discount to ABBV's 96.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, ABBV's 16.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than JPM's 18.4x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $200M | $2.1B | $1.2B | $402.8B | $896.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $151M | $2.1B | $1.3B | $466.6B | $1.50T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.94x | -8.02x | -6.10x | 96.09x | 16.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 15.96x | 14.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 16.53x | 18.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 18.82x | 1387.11x | 21.01x | 6.59x | 3.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 3.94x | 11.15x | — | 2.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 22.61x | 8.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ABBV leads this category, winning 6 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 $-87 for NKTR. CLDX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ABBV scores 6/9 vs NKTR's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -50.7% | -87.0% | +62.1% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.3% | -46.6% | -40.7% | +3.1% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -35.2% | -57.2% | +23.9% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -11.1% | -44.7% | -55.7% | +21.5% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.00x | 1.66x | — | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$42M | -$27M | $134M | $63.8B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $97M | $29M | $15M | $5.2B | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $54M | $2M | $149M | $69.1B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -15.39x | — | -4.15x | 3.28x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NKTR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABBV five years ago would be worth $22,367 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,239 for NKTR. Over the past 12 months, NKTR leads with a +577.9% total return vs IVA's +13.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NKTR at 90.8% vs CLDX's -5.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.1% | +15.8% | +36.8% | +0.8% | -0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +13.6% | +53.7% | +577.9% | +21.9% | +21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.7% | -15.7% | +594.5% | +79.3% | +138.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -75.2% | +2.1% | -77.6% | +123.7% | +118.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -71.3% | -48.5% | -73.6% | +362.2% | +465.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +3.1% | -5.5% | +90.8% | +21.5% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ABBV and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABBV is the less volatile stock with a 0.14 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than IVA's 1.59 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JPM currently trades 95.1% from its 52-week high vs IVA's 48.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.59x | 1.54x | 1.50x | 0.14x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $7.98 | $35.79 | $109.00 | $244.81 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.85 | $19.52 | $7.99 | $181.73 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +48.2% | +87.4% | +54.5% | +93.0% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 28.4 | 45.7 | 32.1 | 62.8 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 478K | 768K | 994K | 4.6M | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
ABBV leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: IVA as "Buy", CLDX as "Buy", NKTR as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 328.6% upside for IVA (target: $17) vs 5.9% for JPM (target: $340). For income investors, ABBV offers the higher dividend yield at 2.89% vs JPM's 1.86%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $16.50 | $49.00 | $149.60 | $256.92 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 19 | 33 | 41 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +2.9% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 43 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $6.57 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +3.9% |
ABBV leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Analyst Outlook). JPM leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
IVA vs CLDX vs NKTR vs ABBV vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IVA or CLDX or NKTR or ABBV or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the stronger pick with 8. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -78. 6% for Celldex Therapeutics, Inc. (CLDX). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Inventiva S. A. (IVA) a "Buy" — based on 8 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 — IVA or CLDX or NKTR or ABBV or JPM?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus AbbVie Inc. at 96. 1x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — IVA or CLDX or NKTR or ABBV or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) delivered a total return of +123. 7%, compared to -77. 6% for Nektar Therapeutics (NKTR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus NKTR's -73. 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 — IVA or CLDX or NKTR or ABBV or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 14β versus Inventiva S. A. 's 1. 59β — meaning IVA is approximately 1066% more volatile than ABBV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Celldex Therapeutics, Inc. (CLDX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — IVA or CLDX or NKTR or ABBV or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is pulling ahead at 8. 6% versus -78. 6% for Celldex Therapeutics, Inc. (CLDX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: JPMorgan Chase & Co. grew EPS 1. 5% year-over-year, compared to -59. 2% for Celldex Therapeutics, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, IVA leads at 29. 9% 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 — IVA or CLDX or NKTR or ABBV or JPM?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 4% net margin versus -172. 5% for Celldex Therapeutics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 20. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ABBV leads at 32. 8% versus -191. 6% for CLDX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — IVA leads at 100. 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.
07Is IVA or CLDX or NKTR or ABBV or JPM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 16. 0x for AbbVie Inc. — 1. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IVA: 328. 6% to $16. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — IVA or CLDX or NKTR or ABBV or JPM?
In this comparison, ABBV (2.
9% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield) pay a dividend. IVA, CLDX, NKTR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is IVA or CLDX or NKTR or ABBV or JPM 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. 14), 2. 9% yield, +362. 2% 10Y return). Inventiva S. A. (IVA) carries a higher beta of 1. 59 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABBV: +362. 2%, IVA: -71. 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.
10What are the main differences between IVA and CLDX and NKTR and ABBV and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (IVA (Healthcare) and CLDX (Healthcare) and NKTR (Healthcare) and ABBV (Healthcare) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: IVA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CLDX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NKTR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ABBV is a large-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. ABBV, JPM pay a dividend while IVA, CLDX, NKTR 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.