Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LGND vs PRGO vs INVA vs OMAB vs RPRX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Biotechnology
Airlines, Airports & Air Services
Biotechnology
LGND vs PRGO vs INVA vs OMAB vs RPRX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Biotechnology | Airlines, Airports & Air Services | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $4.13B | $1.61B | $1.93B | $5.16B | $21.52B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $251M | $4.18B | $424M | $15.96B | $2.44B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $49M | $-1.82B | $504M | $5.34B | $828M |
| Gross Margin | 85.9% | 34.2% | 76.2% | 75.6% | 74.1% |
| Operating Margin | 7.0% | -4.1% | 14.8% | 56.0% | 65.1% |
| Forward P/E | 23.6x | 5.6x | 11.9x | 0.8x | 10.3x |
| Total Debt | $7M | $3.97B | $269M | $13.59B | $8.95B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $72M | $532M | $551M | $3.10B | $619M |
LGND vs PRGO vs INVA vs OMAB vs RPRX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ligand Pharmaceutic… (LGND) | 100 | 188.0 | +88.0% |
| Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) | 100 | 21.2 | -78.8% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 163.1 | +63.1% |
| Grupo Aeroportuario… (OMAB) | 100 | 288.0 | +188.0% |
| Royalty Pharma plc (RPRX) | 100 | 103.4 | +3.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LGND vs PRGO vs INVA vs OMAB vs RPRX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LGND is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth and momentum is your priority.
- 27.3% revenue growth vs PRGO's -2.8%
- +99.1% vs PRGO's -51.2%
PRGO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 1.18, yield 9.8%
- 9.8% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs OMAB's 5.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
INVA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 18.5%, EPS growth 8.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.13, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 14.64x
- Beta 0.13, current ratio 14.64x
- 118.9% margin vs PRGO's -43.5%
OMAB is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 192.8% 10Y total return vs INVA's 94.9%
- PEG 0.02 vs RPRX's 1.45
- Lower P/E (0.8x vs 11.9x), PEG 0.02 vs 1.15
Among these 5 stocks, RPRX doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 27.3% revenue growth vs PRGO's -2.8% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (0.8x vs 11.9x), PEG 0.02 vs 1.15 | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs PRGO's -43.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.13 vs PRGO's 1.18, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 9.8% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs OMAB's 5.0%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +99.1% vs PRGO's -51.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.4% ROA vs PRGO's -19.8%, ROIC 14.2% vs 3.7% |
LGND vs PRGO vs INVA vs OMAB vs RPRX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
LGND vs PRGO vs INVA vs OMAB vs RPRX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LGND leads in 2 of 6 categories
PRGO leads 2 • OMAB leads 1 • INVA leads 0 • RPRX leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LGND leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
OMAB is the larger business by revenue, generating $16.0B annually — 63.5x LGND's $251M. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PRGO's -43.5%. On growth, LGND holds the edge at +122.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $251M | $4.2B | $424M | $16.0B | $2.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $52M | $58M | $86M | $9.8B | $1.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $49M | -$1.8B | $504M | $5.3B | $828M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $31M | $108M | $181M | $5.5B | $2.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +85.9% | +34.2% | +76.2% | +75.6% | +74.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +7.0% | -4.1% | +14.8% | +56.0% | +65.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +19.3% | -43.5% | +118.9% | +33.5% | +33.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +12.2% | +2.6% | +42.8% | +34.3% | +107.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +122.8% | -7.2% | +10.6% | -0.0% | +11.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +15.6% | -56.4% | +4.0% | +2.6% | -100.0% |
Valuation Metrics
PRGO leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 75% valuation discount to RPRX's 27.9x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), OMAB offers better value at 0.44x vs RPRX's 3.95x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.1B | $1.6B | $1.9B | $5.2B | $21.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $4.1B | $5.1B | $1.7B | $5.8B | $29.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -956.05x | -1.14x | 6.91x | 16.67x | 27.89x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 23.65x | 5.56x | 11.91x | 0.77x | 10.26x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.67x | 0.44x | 3.95x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 322.10x | 7.42x | 8.10x | 10.14x | 19.09x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 24.74x | 0.38x | 4.55x | 5.58x | 9.05x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.63x | 0.55x | 1.65x | 7.79x | 2.89x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 53.41x | 11.12x | 9.88x | 12.09x | 8.64x |
Profitability & Efficiency
OMAB leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
OMAB delivers a 50.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $51 in annual profit, vs $-51 for PRGO. LGND carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PRGO's 1.35x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), OMAB scores 6/9 vs RPRX's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +5.1% | -50.7% | +46.5% | +50.6% | +8.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +3.3% | -19.8% | +32.4% | +17.6% | +4.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.3% | +3.7% | +14.2% | +31.7% | +6.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -2.7% | +4.3% | +12.4% | +35.6% | +8.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 1.35x | 0.23x | 1.19x | 0.92x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$65M | $3.4B | -$282M | $10.5B | $8.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $72M | $532M | $551M | $3.1B | $619M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $7M | $4.0B | $269M | $13.6B | $9.0B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 22.69x | -7.20x | 63.45x | 6.08x | 3.37x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LGND leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in OMAB five years ago would be worth $25,778 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,986 for PRGO. Over the past 12 months, LGND leads with a +99.1% total return vs PRGO's -51.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors LGND at 39.5% vs PRGO's -25.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +10.6% | -13.5% | +14.7% | -1.8% | +29.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +99.1% | -51.2% | +21.7% | +16.1% | +56.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +171.6% | -58.1% | +95.2% | +40.1% | +48.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +61.0% | -60.1% | +94.4% | +157.8% | +32.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +73.0% | -77.7% | +94.9% | +192.8% | +22.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +39.5% | -25.2% | +25.0% | +11.9% | +14.1% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — INVA and RPRX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INVA is the less volatile stock with a 0.13 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PRGO's 1.18 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RPRX currently trades 97.2% from its 52-week high vs PRGO's 41.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.99x | 1.18x | 0.13x | 0.62x | 0.45x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $247.38 | $28.44 | $25.15 | $134.99 | $51.65 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $98.89 | $9.23 | $16.52 | $89.53 | $32.15 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +85.0% | +41.2% | +90.7% | +79.3% | +97.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 59.3 | 60.9 | 39.9 | 40.5 | 66.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 226K | 3.4M | 621K | 92K | 3.0M |
Analyst Outlook
PRGO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LGND as "Buy", PRGO as "Hold", INVA as "Buy", OMAB as "Buy", RPRX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 70.6% upside for PRGO (target: $20) vs 7.1% for RPRX (target: $54). For income investors, PRGO offers the higher dividend yield at 9.81% vs RPRX's 1.35%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $267.75 | $20.00 | $37.67 | $127.00 | $53.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 17 | 36 | 10 | 13 | 11 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +9.8% | — | +5.0% | +1.3% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 10 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $1.15 | — | $92.57 | $0.68 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +0.0% | +5.7% |
LGND leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). PRGO leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
LGND vs PRGO vs INVA vs OMAB vs RPRX: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LGND or PRGO or INVA or OMAB or RPRX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Ligand Pharmaceuticals Incorporated (LGND) is the stronger pick with 27.
3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 8% for Perrigo Company plc (PRGO). Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) offers the better valuation at 6. 9x trailing P/E (11. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Ligand Pharmaceuticals Incorporated (LGND) a "Buy" — based on 17 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 — LGND or PRGO or INVA or OMAB or RPRX?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus Royalty Pharma plc at 27. 9x. On forward P/E, Grupo Aeroportuario del Centro Norte, S. A. B. de C. V. is actually cheaper at 0. 8x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Grupo Aeroportuario del Centro Norte, S. A. B. de C. V. wins at 0. 02x versus Royalty Pharma plc's 1. 45x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LGND or PRGO or INVA or OMAB or RPRX?
Over the past 5 years, Grupo Aeroportuario del Centro Norte, S.
A. B. de C. V. (OMAB) delivered a total return of +157. 8%, compared to -60. 1% for Perrigo Company plc (PRGO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: OMAB returned +192. 8% versus PRGO's -77. 7%. 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 — LGND or PRGO or INVA or OMAB or RPRX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 13β versus Perrigo Company plc's 1. 18β — meaning PRGO is approximately 837% more volatile than INVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Ligand Pharmaceuticals Incorporated (LGND) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 135% for Perrigo Company plc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LGND or PRGO or INVA or OMAB or RPRX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Ligand Pharmaceuticals Incorporated (LGND) is pulling ahead at 27.
3% versus -2. 8% for Perrigo Company plc (PRGO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to -723. 2% for Perrigo Company plc. Over a 3-year CAGR, OMAB leads at 10. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — LGND or PRGO or INVA or OMAB or RPRX?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -33. 5% for Perrigo Company plc — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: RPRX leads at 65. 6% versus -13. 5% for LGND. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RPRX 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 LGND or PRGO or INVA or OMAB or RPRX more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Grupo Aeroportuario del Centro Norte, S. A. B. de C. V. (OMAB) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 02x versus Royalty Pharma plc's 1. 45x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Grupo Aeroportuario del Centro Norte, S. A. B. de C. V. (OMAB) trades at 0. 8x forward P/E versus 23. 6x for Ligand Pharmaceuticals Incorporated — 22. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PRGO: 70. 6% to $20. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — LGND or PRGO or INVA or OMAB or RPRX?
In this comparison, PRGO (9.
8% yield), OMAB (5. 0% yield), RPRX (1. 3% yield) pay a dividend. LGND, INVA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LGND or PRGO or INVA or OMAB or RPRX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Royalty Pharma plc (RPRX) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
45), 1. 3% yield). Both have compounded well over 10 years (RPRX: +22. 9%, LGND: +73. 0%), 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 LGND and PRGO and INVA and OMAB and RPRX?
These companies operate in different sectors (LGND (Healthcare) and PRGO (Healthcare) and INVA (Healthcare) and OMAB (Industrials) and RPRX (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: LGND is a small-cap high-growth stock; PRGO is a small-cap income-oriented stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; OMAB is a small-cap deep-value stock; RPRX is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. PRGO, OMAB, RPRX pay a dividend while LGND, INVA 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.
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.