Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
IVA vs MDGL vs HALO vs ARWR vs ABBV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
IVA vs MDGL vs HALO vs ARWR vs ABBV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $200M | $11.08B | $8.24B | $10.50B | $402.80B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $30M | $1.13B | $1.51B | $622M | $61.16B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-415M | $-309M | $349M | $-301M | $4.23B |
| Gross Margin | 92.5% | 93.1% | 76.9% | 99.0% | 70.2% |
| Operating Margin | -6.7% | -27.7% | 57.0% | -35.7% | 26.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 8.6x | — | 16.0x |
| Total Debt | $54M | $354M | $2.14B | $366M | $69.07B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $97M | $199M | $134M | $227M | $5.23B |
IVA vs MDGL vs HALO vs ARWR vs ABBV — 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% |
| Madrigal Pharmaceut… (MDGL) | 100 | 468.5 | +368.5% |
| Halozyme Therapeuti… (HALO) | 100 | 255.6 | +155.6% |
| Arrowhead Pharmaceu… (ARWR) | 100 | 173.0 | +73.0% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 239.9 | +139.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IVA vs MDGL vs HALO vs ARWR vs ABBV
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.
MDGL is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 39.4% 10Y total return vs ARWR's 11.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.49, Low D/E 58.8%, current ratio 4.01x
- Beta 0.49, current ratio 4.01x
HALO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and quality.
- Lower P/E (8.6x vs 16.0x)
- 23.1% margin vs IVA's -13.8%
- 14.7% ROA vs IVA's -232.6%
ARWR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 232.6%, EPS growth 99.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 50.5%
- 232.6% revenue growth vs IVA's -47.4%
- +359.4% vs IVA's +13.6%
ABBV ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 43 yrs, beta 0.14, yield 2.9%
- Beta 0.14 vs ARWR's 1.69
- 2.9% yield; 43-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 232.6% revenue growth vs IVA's -47.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.6x vs 16.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 23.1% margin vs IVA's -13.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.14 vs ARWR's 1.69 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield; 43-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +359.4% vs IVA's +13.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.7% ROA vs IVA's -232.6% |
IVA vs MDGL vs HALO vs ARWR vs ABBV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
IVA vs MDGL vs HALO vs ARWR vs ABBV — 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
ABBV leads 2 • ARWR leads 1 • IVA leads 0 • MDGL leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HALO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABBV is the larger business by revenue, generating $61.2B annually — 2025.6x IVA's $30M. HALO is the more profitable business, keeping 23.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to IVA's -13.8%. On growth, MDGL holds the edge at +126.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $30M | $1.1B | $1.5B | $622M | $61.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$195M | -$312M | $961M | -$197M | $24.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$415M | -$309M | $349M | -$301M | $4.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$177M | -$272M | $668M | -$51M | $18.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +92.5% | +93.1% | +76.9% | +99.0% | +70.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.7% | -27.7% | +57.0% | -35.7% | +26.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -13.8% | -27.3% | +23.1% | -48.4% | +6.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.9% | -24.1% | +44.3% | -8.2% | +30.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +62.9% | +126.8% | +42.2% | -86.4% | +10.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -72.3% | +2.1% | +31.2% | -133.8% | +57.4% |
Valuation Metrics
HALO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 27.1x trailing earnings, HALO trades at a 72% valuation discount to ABBV's 96.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, HALO's 11.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ARWR's 87.0x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $200M | $11.1B | $8.2B | $10.5B | $402.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $151M | $11.2B | $10.3B | $10.6B | $466.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.94x | -37.41x | 27.15x | -6108.20x | 96.09x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 8.57x | — | 15.96x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 1.18x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 11.34x | 86.99x | 16.53x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 18.82x | 11.57x | 5.90x | 12.65x | 6.59x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 17.90x | 176.41x | 19.80x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 12.79x | 66.91x | 22.61x |
Profitability & Efficiency
HALO leads this category, winning 4 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 $-55 for ARWR. MDGL carries lower financial leverage with a 0.59x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to HALO's 43.89x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ARWR scores 6/9 vs IVA's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | -50.2% | +126.3% | -55.1% | +62.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.3% | -25.4% | +14.7% | -18.1% | +3.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -29.4% | +32.1% | +9.3% | +23.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -11.1% | -32.9% | +38.2% | +8.8% | +21.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.59x | 43.89x | 0.73x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$42M | $156M | $2.0B | $140M | $63.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $97M | $199M | $134M | $227M | $5.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $54M | $354M | $2.1B | $366M | $69.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -15.39x | -25.80x | 44.97x | -2.03x | 3.28x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
ARWR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MDGL five years ago would be worth $44,660 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,477 for IVA. Over the past 12 months, ARWR leads with a +359.4% total return vs IVA's +13.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ARWR at 28.2% vs IVA's 3.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.1% | -19.0% | -1.2% | +9.9% | +0.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +13.6% | +61.8% | +27.4% | +359.4% | +21.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +9.7% | +80.9% | +106.4% | +110.6% | +79.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -75.2% | +346.6% | +60.3% | -15.7% | +123.7% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -71.3% | +3940.1% | +701.6% | +1169.5% | +362.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +3.1% | +21.9% | +27.3% | +28.2% | +21.5% |
Risk & Volatility
ABBV leads this category, winning 2 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 ARWR's 1.69 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ABBV currently trades 93.0% 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 | 0.49x | 0.58x | 1.69x | 0.14x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $7.98 | $615.00 | $82.22 | $82.00 | $244.81 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $2.85 | $275.00 | $51.06 | $14.30 | $181.73 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +48.2% | +78.2% | +84.5% | +90.9% | +93.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 28.4 | 42.3 | 57.1 | 50.6 | 62.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 478K | 263K | 1.5M | 1.6M | 4.6M |
Analyst Outlook
ABBV leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: IVA as "Buy", MDGL as "Buy", HALO as "Buy", ARWR as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 328.6% upside for IVA (target: $17) vs 12.7% for ARWR (target: $84). ABBV is the only dividend payer here at 2.89% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $16.50 | $710.22 | $88.25 | $84.00 | $256.92 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 23 | 27 | 20 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +2.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | — | — | 43 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $6.57 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.2% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
HALO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). ABBV leads in 2 (Risk & Volatility, Analyst Outlook).
IVA vs MDGL vs HALO vs ARWR vs ABBV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IVA or MDGL or HALO or ARWR or ABBV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(ARWR) is the stronger pick with 232. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -47. 4% for Inventiva S. A. (IVA). Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO) offers the better valuation at 27. 1x trailing P/E (8. 6x 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 MDGL or HALO or ARWR or ABBV?
On trailing P/E, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the cheapest at 27. 1x versus AbbVie Inc. at 96. 1x. On forward P/E, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 6x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — IVA or MDGL or HALO or ARWR or ABBV?
Over the past 5 years, Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(MDGL) delivered a total return of +346. 6%, compared to -75. 2% for Inventiva S. A. (IVA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MDGL returned +39. 4% versus IVA's -71. 3%. 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 MDGL or HALO or ARWR or ABBV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 14β versus Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 1. 69β — meaning ARWR is approximately 1142% more volatile than ABBV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (MDGL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 59% versus 44% for Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — IVA or MDGL or HALO or ARWR or ABBV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(ARWR) is pulling ahead at 232. 6% versus -47. 4% for Inventiva S. A. (IVA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. grew EPS 99. 8% year-over-year, compared to -45. 7% for Inventiva S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ARWR leads at 50. 5% 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 MDGL or HALO or ARWR or ABBV?
Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the more profitable company, earning 22. 7% net margin versus -20. 0% for Inventiva S. A. — meaning it keeps 22. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HALO leads at 58. 4% versus -1060. 6% for IVA. 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 MDGL or HALO or ARWR or ABBV more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) trades at 8. 6x forward P/E versus 16. 0x for AbbVie Inc. — 7. 4x 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 MDGL or HALO or ARWR or ABBV?
In this comparison, ABBV (2.
9% yield) pays a dividend. IVA, MDGL, HALO, ARWR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is IVA or MDGL or HALO or ARWR or ABBV 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 MDGL and HALO and ARWR and ABBV?
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: IVA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MDGL is a mid-cap high-growth stock; HALO is a small-cap high-growth stock; ARWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ABBV is a large-cap quality compounder stock. ABBV pays a dividend while IVA, MDGL, HALO, ARWR 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.