Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
LIPO vs DBVT vs HALO vs ABBV vs MRK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
LIPO vs DBVT vs HALO vs ABBV vs MRK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $27K | $1712.35T | $7.68B | $358.42B | $277.34B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $174K | $0.00 | $1.40B | $61.16B | $64.93B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1.26B | $-168M | $317M | $4.23B | $18.25B |
| Gross Margin | -15.4% | — | 81.9% | 70.2% | 74.2% |
| Operating Margin | -7361.3% | — | 58.4% | 26.7% | 41.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 8.1x | 14.3x | 21.9x |
| Total Debt | $48K | $22M | $0.00 | $69.07B | $50.53B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $2M | $194M | $134M | $5.23B | $14.56B |
LIPO vs DBVT vs HALO vs ABBV vs MRK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 22 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lipella Pharmaceuti… (LIPO) | 100 | 0.1 | -99.9% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 130.7 | +30.7% |
| Halozyme Therapeuti… (HALO) | 100 | 114.6 | +14.6% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 125.4 | +25.4% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 101.2 | +1.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LIPO vs DBVT vs HALO vs ABBV vs MRK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LIPO is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 19.3%, EPS growth 22.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 27.4%
DBVT is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +110.4% vs LIPO's -98.9%
HALO has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.35 vs MRK's 1.03
- 37.6% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0%
- Lower P/E (8.1x vs 21.9x), PEG 0.35 vs 1.03
ABBV is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 13 yrs, beta 0.34, yield 3.2%
- 295.5% 10Y total return vs HALO's 5.7%
- Beta 0.34, yield 3.2%, current ratio 0.67x
- Beta 0.34 vs LIPO's 1.77
MRK ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.48, Low D/E 96.0%, current ratio 1.54x
- 28.1% margin vs LIPO's -7.2K%
- 14.6% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 37.6% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.1x vs 21.9x), PEG 0.35 vs 1.03 | |
| Quality / Margins | 28.1% margin vs LIPO's -7.2K% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.34 vs LIPO's 1.77 | |
| Dividends | 3.2% yield, 13-year raise streak, vs MRK's 2.9%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +110.4% vs LIPO's -98.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.6% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0% |
LIPO vs DBVT vs HALO vs ABBV vs MRK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
LIPO vs DBVT vs HALO vs ABBV vs MRK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HALO leads in 4 of 6 categories
LIPO leads 0 • DBVT leads 0 • ABBV leads 0 • MRK leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HALO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK and DBVT operate at a comparable scale, with $64.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. MRK is the more profitable business, keeping 28.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LIPO's -7244.7%. On growth, HALO holds the edge at +51.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $173,666 | $0 | $1.4B | $61.2B | $64.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$1.3B | -$112M | $945M | $24.5B | $32.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$1.3B | -$168M | $317M | $4.2B | $18.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$2.4B | -$151M | $645M | $18.7B | $12.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -15.4% | — | +81.9% | +70.2% | +74.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -7361.3% | — | +58.4% | +26.7% | +41.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -7244.7% | — | +22.7% | +6.9% | +28.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -13598.6% | — | +46.2% | +30.6% | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | — | +51.6% | +10.0% | +4.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +78.3% | +91.5% | -2.1% | +57.4% | -19.6% |
Valuation Metrics
HALO leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.4x trailing earnings, MRK trades at a 82% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MRK offers better value at 0.73x vs HALO's 1.11x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $27,462 | $1712.35T | $7.7B | $358.4B | $277.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$2M | $1712.35T | $7.5B | $422.3B | $313.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.01x | -0.76x | 25.46x | 85.50x | 15.42x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 8.09x | 14.28x | 21.93x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 1.11x | — | 0.73x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 8.34x | 14.96x | 10.68x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.05x | — | 5.50x | 5.86x | 4.27x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.01x | 0.66x | 165.47x | — | 5.35x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 11.91x | 20.12x | 22.44x |
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 $-130 for DBVT. LIPO carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MRK's 0.96x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ABBV scores 6/9 vs MRK's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -84.6% | -130.2% | +6.5% | +62.1% | +36.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -53.5% | -89.0% | +12.5% | +3.1% | +14.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | — | +73.4% | +23.9% | +22.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -198.8% | -145.7% | +38.2% | +21.5% | +23.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.13x | — | — | 0.96x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$2M | -$172M | -$134M | $63.8B | $36.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $2M | $194M | $134M | $5.2B | $14.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $47,605 | $22M | $0 | $69.1B | $50.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -189.82x | 46.08x | 3.28x | 19.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HALO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABBV five years ago would be worth $20,131 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $46 for LIPO. Over the past 12 months, DBVT leads with a +110.4% total return vs LIPO's -98.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HALO at 29.1% vs LIPO's -88.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -84.7% | +4.9% | -7.3% | -10.1% | +6.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -98.9% | +110.4% | -7.1% | +11.3% | +46.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.8% | +19.7% | +115.3% | +50.4% | +2.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.5% | -69.1% | +37.0% | +101.3% | +70.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.5% | -87.0% | +570.7% | +295.5% | +166.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -88.0% | +6.2% | +29.1% | +14.6% | +0.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ABBV and MRK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABBV is the less volatile stock with a 0.34 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LIPO's 1.77 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. MRK currently trades 89.7% from its 52-week high vs LIPO's 0.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.77x | 1.26x | 0.56x | 0.34x | 0.48x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.17 | $26.18 | $82.22 | $244.81 | $125.14 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.01 | $7.53 | $47.50 | $176.57 | $73.31 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +0.8% | +76.3% | +79.3% | +82.8% | +89.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 36.7 | 48.1 | 52.4 | 46.8 | 46.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 13K | 252K | 1.4M | 5.8M | 7.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ABBV and MRK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: DBVT as "Buy", HALO as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", MRK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 131.8% upside for DBVT (target: $46) vs 15.2% for MRK (target: $129). For income investors, ABBV offers the higher dividend yield at 3.24% vs MRK's 2.90%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $46.33 | $78.33 | $256.64 | $129.31 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 15 | 27 | 41 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +3.2% | +2.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | — | 13 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $6.57 | $3.26 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.5% | +0.3% | +1.8% |
HALO leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Valuation Metrics. 2 categories are tied.
LIPO vs DBVT vs HALO vs ABBV vs MRK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LIPO or DBVT or HALO or ABBV or MRK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the stronger pick with 37. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 2% for Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK). Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) offers the better valuation at 15. 4x trailing P/E (21. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT) a "Buy" — based on 15 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 — LIPO or DBVT or HALO or ABBV or MRK?
On trailing P/E, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the cheapest at 15. 4x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 5x. On forward P/E, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 1x — 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: Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. wins at 0. 35x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 03x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LIPO or DBVT or HALO or ABBV or MRK?
Over the past 5 years, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) delivered a total return of +101. 3%, compared to -99. 5% for Lipella Pharmaceuticals Inc. (LIPO). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HALO returned +570. 7% versus LIPO's -99. 5%. 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 — LIPO or DBVT or HALO or ABBV or MRK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 34β versus Lipella Pharmaceuticals Inc. 's 1. 77β — meaning LIPO is approximately 423% more volatile than ABBV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Lipella Pharmaceuticals Inc. (LIPO) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 96% for Merck & Co. , Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LIPO or DBVT or HALO or ABBV or MRK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is pulling ahead at 37. 6% versus 1. 2% for Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Lipella Pharmaceuticals Inc. grew EPS 22. 2% year-over-year, compared to -347. 5% for DBV Technologies S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, HALO leads at 28. 4% 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 — LIPO or DBVT or HALO or ABBV or MRK?
Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the more profitable company, earning 28. 1% net margin versus -935. 2% for Lipella Pharmaceuticals Inc. — meaning it keeps 28. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HALO leads at 58. 4% versus -947. 2% for LIPO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HALO leads at 78. 1%, 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 LIPO or DBVT or HALO or ABBV or MRK 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, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus Merck & Co. , Inc. 's 1. 03x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO) trades at 8. 1x forward P/E versus 21. 9x for Merck & Co. , Inc. — 13. 8x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DBVT: 131. 8% to $46. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — LIPO or DBVT or HALO or ABBV or MRK?
In this comparison, ABBV (3.
2% yield), MRK (2. 9% yield) pay a dividend. LIPO, DBVT, HALO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LIPO or DBVT or HALO or ABBV or MRK 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. 34), 3. 2% yield, +295. 5% 10Y return). Lipella Pharmaceuticals Inc. (LIPO) carries a higher beta of 1. 77 — 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: +295. 5%, LIPO: -99. 5%), 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 LIPO and DBVT and HALO and ABBV and MRK?
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: LIPO is a small-cap high-growth stock; DBVT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; HALO is a small-cap high-growth stock; ABBV is a large-cap income-oriented stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock. ABBV, MRK pay a dividend while LIPO, DBVT, HALO 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.