Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MDGL vs GPCR vs ARWR vs TERN vs HALO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
MDGL vs GPCR vs ARWR vs TERN vs HALO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $12.27B | $2.25B | $10.92B | $4.63B | $7.68B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1.13B | $0.00 | $622M | $0.00 | $1.40B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-309M | $-170M | $-301M | $-94M | $317M |
| Gross Margin | 93.1% | — | 85.1% | — | 81.9% |
| Operating Margin | -27.7% | — | -35.7% | — | 58.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | — | 8.1x |
| Total Debt | $354M | $6M | $366M | $1M | $0.00 |
| Cash & Equiv. | $199M | $800M | $227M | $161M | $134M |
MDGL vs GPCR vs ARWR vs TERN vs HALO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Feb 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Madrigal Pharmaceut… (MDGL) | 100 | 197.4 | +97.4% |
| Structure Therapeut… (GPCR) | 100 | 153.2 | +53.2% |
| Arrowhead Pharmaceu… (ARWR) | 100 | 241.3 | +141.3% |
| Terns Pharmaceutica… (TERN) | 100 | 522.5 | +422.5% |
| Halozyme Therapeuti… (HALO) | 100 | 135.8 | +35.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MDGL vs GPCR vs ARWR vs TERN vs HALO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MDGL is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 39.2% 10Y total return vs ARWR's 12.5%
Among these 5 stocks, GPCR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ARWR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 232.6%, EPS growth 99.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 50.5%
- 232.6% revenue growth vs GPCR's -18.6%
TERN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- beta 0.39
- Lower volatility, beta 0.39, Low D/E 0.4%, current ratio 23.14x
- Beta 0.39, current ratio 23.14x
- Beta 0.39 vs ARWR's 1.81, lower leverage
HALO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and quality.
- Better valuation composite
- 22.7% margin vs ARWR's -48.4%
- 12.5% ROA vs TERN's -28.5%, ROIC 73.4% vs -42.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 232.6% revenue growth vs GPCR's -18.6% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 22.7% margin vs ARWR's -48.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.39 vs ARWR's 1.81, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +16.5% vs HALO's -7.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.5% ROA vs TERN's -28.5%, ROIC 73.4% vs -42.2% |
MDGL vs GPCR vs ARWR vs TERN vs HALO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
MDGL vs GPCR vs ARWR vs TERN vs HALO — 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
TERN leads 2 • MDGL leads 0 • GPCR leads 0 • ARWR 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)
HALO and TERN operate at a comparable scale, with $1.4B and $0 in trailing revenue. HALO is the more profitable business, keeping 22.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ARWR's -48.4%. On growth, MDGL holds the edge at +126.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1.1B | $0 | $622M | $0 | $1.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$312M | -$209M | -$203M | -$108M | $945M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$309M | -$170M | -$301M | -$94M | $317M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$272M | -$159M | -$51M | -$78M | $645M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +93.1% | — | +85.1% | — | +81.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -27.7% | — | -35.7% | — | +58.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -27.3% | — | -48.4% | — | +22.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -24.1% | — | -8.2% | — | +46.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +126.8% | — | -86.4% | — | +51.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.1% | -29.6% | -133.8% | +3.6% | -2.1% |
Valuation Metrics
HALO leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, HALO's 8.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ARWR's 90.4x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $12.3B | $2.3B | $10.9B | $4.6B | $7.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $12.4B | $1.5B | $11.1B | $4.5B | $7.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -41.62x | -16.31x | -6389.34x | -47.28x | 25.46x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | 8.09x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 1.11x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 90.41x | — | 8.34x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 12.80x | — | 13.16x | — | 5.50x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 19.91x | 1.53x | 20.71x | 12.17x | 165.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 69.58x | — | 11.91x |
Profitability & Efficiency
HALO leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HALO delivers a 6.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-55 for ARWR. TERN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ARWR's 0.73x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ARWR scores 6/9 vs TERN's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -50.2% | -15.1% | -55.5% | -30.0% | +6.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -25.4% | -14.4% | -18.1% | -28.5% | +12.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -29.4% | -30.3% | +9.3% | -42.2% | +73.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -32.9% | -24.1% | +8.8% | -33.7% | +38.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.59x | 0.00x | 0.73x | 0.00x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $156M | -$793M | $140M | -$160M | -$134M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $199M | $800M | $227M | $161M | $134M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $354M | $6M | $366M | $1M | $0 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -17.51x | — | -1.03x | — | 46.08x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TERN 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 $41,011 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $11,743 for ARWR. Over the past 12 months, TERN leads with a +1647.5% total return vs HALO's -7.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TERN at 59.1% vs GPCR's 17.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -9.9% | -42.5% | +15.0% | +32.0% | -7.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +79.0% | +47.2% | +496.9% | +1647.5% | -7.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +73.2% | +63.1% | +92.7% | +302.7% | +115.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +310.1% | +50.6% | +17.4% | +218.6% | +37.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +3921.5% | +50.6% | +1253.3% | +187.9% | +570.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +20.1% | +17.7% | +24.4% | +59.1% | +29.1% |
Risk & Volatility
TERN leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TERN is the less volatile stock with a 0.39 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ARWR's 1.81 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TERN currently trades 99.6% from its 52-week high vs GPCR's 41.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.57x | 0.96x | 1.81x | 0.39x | 0.56x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $615.00 | $94.90 | $79.48 | $53.18 | $82.22 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $265.00 | $15.80 | $12.44 | $2.66 | $47.50 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +87.0% | +41.3% | +98.1% | +99.6% | +79.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.2 | 30.2 | 69.7 | 74.2 | 52.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 310K | 953K | 1.9M | 6.7M | 1.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MDGL as "Buy", GPCR as "Buy", ARWR as "Buy", TERN as "Buy", HALO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 193.1% upside for GPCR (target: $115) vs 4.2% for ARWR (target: $81).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $705.67 | $114.75 | $81.22 | $55.56 | $78.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 23 | 14 | 20 | 16 | 27 |
| 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% | +4.5% |
HALO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). TERN leads in 2 (Total Returns, Risk & Volatility).
MDGL vs GPCR vs ARWR vs TERN vs HALO: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MDGL or GPCR or ARWR or TERN or HALO 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 37. 6% for Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO). Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO) offers the better valuation at 25. 5x trailing P/E (8. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (MDGL) a "Buy" — based on 23 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 — MDGL or GPCR or ARWR or TERN or HALO?
Over the past 5 years, Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(MDGL) delivered a total return of +310. 1%, compared to +17. 4% for Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (ARWR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MDGL returned +39. 2% versus GPCR's +50. 6%. 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 — MDGL or GPCR or ARWR or TERN or HALO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Terns Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(TERN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 39β versus Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 1. 81β — meaning ARWR is approximately 359% more volatile than TERN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Terns Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (TERN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 73% for Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — MDGL or GPCR or ARWR or TERN or HALO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(ARWR) is pulling ahead at 232. 6% versus 37. 6% for Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. grew EPS 99. 8% year-over-year, compared to -25. 4% for Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — MDGL or GPCR or ARWR or TERN or HALO?
Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the more profitable company, earning 22. 7% net margin versus -30. 1% for Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. — 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 -31. 3% for MDGL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ARWR leads at 97. 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.
06Is MDGL or GPCR or ARWR or TERN or HALO more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GPCR: 193.
1% to $114. 75.
07Which pays a better dividend — MDGL or GPCR or ARWR or TERN or HALO?
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.
08Is MDGL or GPCR or ARWR or TERN or HALO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 56), +570. 7% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (HALO: +570. 7%, GPCR: +50. 6%), 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.
09What are the main differences between MDGL and GPCR and ARWR and TERN and HALO?
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: MDGL is a mid-cap high-growth stock; GPCR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ARWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; TERN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HALO is a small-cap high-growth 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.