Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
KNSA vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
KNSA vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $4.22B | $2.50B | $5.53B | $8.98B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $754M | $236M | $0.00 | $4.03B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $73M | $-369M | $-464M | $-185M |
| Gross Margin | 39.0% | 90.7% | — | 24.9% |
| Operating Margin | 12.4% | -168.6% | — | 11.8% |
| Forward P/E | 41.6x | — | — | 16.4x |
| Total Debt | $9M | $99M | $98K | $3.07B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $166M | $222M | $714M | $214M |
KNSA vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kiniksa Pharmaceuti… (KNSA) | 100 | 272.8 | +172.8% |
| Arcus Biosciences, … (RCUS) | 100 | 79.1 | -20.9% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 106.1 | +6.1% |
| Charles River Labor… (CRL) | 100 | 101.3 | +1.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: KNSA vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
KNSA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 0.19
- Rev growth 60.1%, EPS growth 225.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 45.5%
- 192.4% 10Y total return vs IMVT's 173.6%
- 60.1% revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3%
RCUS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +209.6% vs CRL's +32.8%
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.37, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 11.16x
- Beta 1.37, current ratio 11.16x
CRL is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Better valuation composite
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 60.1% revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 9.7% margin vs RCUS's -156.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.19 vs RCUS's 1.95, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +209.6% vs CRL's +32.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 9.9% ROA vs IMVT's -44.1% |
KNSA vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
KNSA vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KNSA leads in 4 of 6 categories
CRL leads 1 • RCUS leads 0 • IMVT leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KNSA leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CRL and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $4.0B and $0 in trailing revenue. KNSA is the more profitable business, keeping 9.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RCUS's -156.4%. On growth, KNSA holds the edge at +55.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $754M | $236M | $0 | $4.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $94M | -$391M | -$487M | $757M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $73M | -$369M | -$464M | -$185M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $164M | -$489M | -$423M | $391M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +39.0% | +90.7% | — | +24.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +12.4% | -168.6% | — | +11.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +9.7% | -156.4% | — | -4.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +21.8% | -2.1% | — | +9.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +55.5% | -39.3% | — | +1.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +145.5% | +10.5% | +19.7% | -160.0% |
Valuation Metrics
CRL leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, CRL's 13.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than KNSA's 51.6x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.2B | $2.5B | $5.5B | $9.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.1B | $2.4B | $4.8B | $11.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 75.91x | -7.54x | -9.97x | -62.52x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 41.56x | — | — | 16.42x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 51.65x | — | — | 12.98x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 6.23x | 10.11x | — | 2.24x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.92x | 4.22x | 5.83x | 2.81x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 166.24x | — | — | 17.31x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KNSA leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KNSA delivers a 13.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $13 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 CRL's 0.95x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KNSA scores 6/9 vs RCUS's 0/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +13.3% | -69.0% | -47.1% | -5.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +9.9% | -35.3% | -44.1% | -2.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +17.1% | -64.1% | — | +6.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +14.0% | -42.1% | -66.1% | +8.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.16x | 0.00x | 0.95x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$156M | -$123M | -$714M | $2.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $166M | $222M | $714M | $214M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $9M | $99M | $98,000 | $3.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -13.38x | — | 6.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
KNSA leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KNSA five years ago would be worth $38,913 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $5,311 for CRL. Over the past 12 months, RCUS leads with a +209.6% total return vs CRL's +32.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors KNSA at 63.0% vs CRL's -1.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +35.5% | +6.5% | +5.1% | -10.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +112.7% | +209.6% | +96.1% | +32.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +333.3% | +24.9% | +40.9% | -4.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +289.1% | -18.6% | +62.4% | -46.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +192.4% | +45.9% | +173.6% | +119.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +63.0% | +7.7% | +12.1% | -1.4% |
Risk & Volatility
KNSA leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KNSA is the less volatile stock with a 0.19 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. KNSA currently trades 97.7% from its 52-week high vs CRL's 79.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.19x | 1.95x | 1.37x | 1.52x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $58.25 | $28.72 | $30.09 | $228.88 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $24.85 | $7.06 | $13.36 | $131.30 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +97.7% | +86.3% | +90.5% | +79.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 74.9 | 60.5 | 60.2 | 57.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 708K | 1.2M | 1.4M | 806K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: KNSA as "Buy", RCUS as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", CRL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 67.2% upside for IMVT (target: $46) vs 12.4% for KNSA (target: $64).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $64.00 | $30.00 | $45.50 | $205.43 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 11 | 18 | 23 | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +0.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.0% |
KNSA leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CRL leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
KNSA vs RCUS vs IMVT vs CRL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is KNSA or RCUS or IMVT or CRL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd.
(KNSA) is the stronger pick with 60. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 3% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS). Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. (KNSA) offers the better valuation at 75. 9x trailing P/E (41. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. (KNSA) 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 has the better valuation — KNSA or RCUS or IMVT or CRL?
On forward P/E, Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.
is actually cheaper at 16. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — KNSA or RCUS or IMVT or CRL?
Over the past 5 years, Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd.
(KNSA) delivered a total return of +289. 1%, compared to -46. 9% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: KNSA returned +192. 4% versus RCUS's +45. 9%. 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 — KNSA or RCUS or IMVT or CRL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd.
(KNSA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 19β versus Arcus Biosciences, Inc. 's 1. 95β — meaning RCUS is approximately 918% more volatile than KNSA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 95% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — KNSA or RCUS or IMVT or CRL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd.
(KNSA) is pulling ahead at 60. 1% versus -4. 3% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. grew EPS 225. 0% year-over-year, compared to -1555. 0% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, KNSA leads at 45. 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 — KNSA or RCUS or IMVT or CRL?
Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd.
(KNSA) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 7% net margin versus -142. 9% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CRL leads at 12. 6% 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.
07Is KNSA or RCUS or IMVT or CRL more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.
(CRL) trades at 16. 4x forward P/E versus 41. 6x for Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. — 25. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IMVT: 67. 2% to $45. 50.
08Which pays a better dividend — KNSA or RCUS or IMVT or CRL?
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.
09Is KNSA or RCUS or IMVT or CRL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd.
(KNSA) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 19), +192. 4% 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 (KNSA: +192. 4%, RCUS: +45. 9%), 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 KNSA and RCUS and IMVT and CRL?
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: KNSA is a small-cap high-growth stock; RCUS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CRL 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.