Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
LGVN vs MESO vs FATE vs NKTR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
LGVN vs MESO vs FATE vs NKTR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $20M | $2.04B | $264M | $1.67B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1M | $17M | $7M | $63M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-23M | $-102M | $-136M | $-121M |
| Gross Margin | 43.7% | -208.5% | — | 86.9% |
| Operating Margin | -19.4% | -6.4% | -22.2% | -156.5% |
| Total Debt | $824K | $128M | $78M | $86M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $5M | $161M | $47M | $15M |
LGVN vs MESO vs FATE vs NKTR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Feb 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Longeveron Inc. (LGVN) | 100 | 1.1 | -98.9% |
| Mesoblast Limited (MESO) | 100 | 82.3 | -17.7% |
| Fate Therapeutics, … (FATE) | 100 | 2.6 | -97.4% |
| Nektar Therapeutics (NKTR) | 100 | 25.0 | -75.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LGVN vs MESO vs FATE vs NKTR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LGVN is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.95
- Lower volatility, beta 0.95, Low D/E 14.5%, current ratio 1.33x
- Beta 0.95, current ratio 1.33x
- Beta 0.95 vs FATE's 2.17, lower leverage
MESO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 191.4%, EPS growth 5.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 19.0%
- 5.4% 10Y total return vs FATE's 33.9%
- 191.4% revenue growth vs FATE's -51.2%
- -13.0% ROA vs LGVN's -143.2%, ROIC -8.5% vs -5.9%
FATE lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
NKTR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and momentum is your priority.
- -192.9% margin vs FATE's -20.5%
- +7.8% vs LGVN's -40.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 191.4% revenue growth vs FATE's -51.2% | |
| Quality / Margins | -192.9% margin vs FATE's -20.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.95 vs FATE's 2.17, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +7.8% vs LGVN's -40.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -13.0% ROA vs LGVN's -143.2%, ROIC -8.5% vs -5.9% |
LGVN vs MESO vs FATE vs NKTR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
LGVN vs MESO vs FATE vs NKTR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NKTR leads in 2 of 6 categories
MESO leads 1 • LGVN leads 0 • FATE leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NKTR leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NKTR is the larger business by revenue, generating $63M annually — 52.2x LGVN's $1M. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from -192.9% (NKTR) to -20.5% (FATE). On growth, MESO holds the edge at +4.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1M | $17M | $7M | $63M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$22M | -$106M | -$148M | -$97M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$23M | -$102M | -$136M | -$121M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$19M | -$49M | -$88M | -$190M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +43.7% | -2.1% | — | +86.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -19.4% | -6.4% | -22.2% | -156.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -18.9% | -5.9% | -20.5% | -192.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -15.9% | -2.8% | -13.2% | -3.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -39.5% | +4.6% | -26.4% | -51.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.1% | +16.0% | +38.6% | +29.7% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — LGVN and MESO and FATE each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $20M | $2.0B | $264M | $1.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $17M | $2.0B | $295M | $1.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.68x | -18.82x | -1.99x | -8.75x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 16.99x | 118.61x | 39.75x | 30.28x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.71x | 3.20x | 1.31x | 15.98x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
MESO leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MESO delivers a -17.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-17 in annual profit, vs $-4 for NKTR. LGVN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.15x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NKTR's 0.95x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MESO scores 5/9 vs NKTR's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -199.8% | -17.1% | -65.8% | -3.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -143.2% | -13.0% | -42.7% | -45.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -5.9% | -8.5% | -36.5% | -75.2% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -159.8% | -9.8% | -43.1% | -59.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.15x | 0.21x | 0.38x | 0.95x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$4M | -$33M | $31M | $71M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $5M | $161M | $47M | $15M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $824,000 | $128M | $78M | $86M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -5.84x | — | -3.30x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NKTR leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MESO five years ago would be worth $11,181 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $161 for LGVN. Over the past 12 months, NKTR leads with a +783.6% total return vs LGVN's -40.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NKTR at 94.6% vs LGVN's -69.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +47.4% | -12.9% | +131.3% | +96.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -40.1% | +45.3% | +139.1% | +783.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.2% | +131.8% | -58.0% | +636.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.4% | +11.8% | -97.0% | -69.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.8% | +5.4% | +33.9% | -57.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -69.8% | +32.3% | -25.1% | +94.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LGVN and FATE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
LGVN is the less volatile stock with a 0.95 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FATE's 2.17 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FATE currently trades 95.0% from its 52-week high vs LGVN's 48.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.95x | 1.70x | 2.17x | 1.85x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $1.80 | $21.50 | $2.41 | $109.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.47 | $9.88 | $0.91 | $7.99 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +48.6% | +73.5% | +95.0% | +78.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.4 | 53.5 | 85.2 | 52.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 6.8M | 256K | 1.8M | 995K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MESO as "Buy", FATE as "Buy", NKTR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 1624.9% upside for FATE (target: $40) vs -27.3% for MESO (target: $12).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $11.50 | $39.50 | $132.83 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 11 | 31 | 33 |
| 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% |
NKTR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). MESO leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
LGVN vs MESO vs FATE vs NKTR: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LGVN or MESO or FATE or NKTR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Mesoblast Limited (MESO) is the stronger pick with 191.
4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -51. 2% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Analysts rate Mesoblast Limited (MESO) 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 is the better long-term investment — LGVN or MESO or FATE or NKTR?
Over the past 5 years, Mesoblast Limited (MESO) delivered a total return of +11.
8%, compared to -98. 4% for Longeveron Inc. (LGVN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: FATE returned +33. 9% versus LGVN's -98. 8%. 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 — LGVN or MESO or FATE or NKTR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Longeveron Inc.
(LGVN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 95β versus Fate Therapeutics, Inc. 's 2. 17β — meaning FATE is approximately 128% more volatile than LGVN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Longeveron Inc. (LGVN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 15% versus 95% for Nektar Therapeutics — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — LGVN or MESO or FATE or NKTR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Mesoblast Limited (MESO) is pulling ahead at 191.
4% versus -51. 2% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fate Therapeutics, Inc. grew EPS 29. 9% year-over-year, compared to -20. 6% for Longeveron Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MESO leads at 19. 0% 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 — LGVN or MESO or FATE or NKTR?
Nektar Therapeutics (NKTR) is the more profitable company, earning -297.
1% net margin versus -20. 5% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. — meaning it keeps -297. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NKTR leads at -253. 7% versus -22. 2% for FATE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NKTR leads at 86. 9%, 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — LGVN or MESO or FATE or NKTR?
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.
07Is LGVN or MESO or FATE or NKTR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Longeveron Inc.
(LGVN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 95)). Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE) carries a higher beta of 2. 17 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (LGVN: -98. 8%, FATE: +33. 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.
08What are the main differences between LGVN and MESO and FATE and NKTR?
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: LGVN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MESO is a small-cap high-growth stock; FATE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NKTR 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.