Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MIST vs INVA vs MRK vs PFE vs ABBV
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
MIST vs INVA vs MRK vs PFE vs ABBV — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $201M | $1.93B | $277.34B | $150.63B | $358.42B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1M | $424M | $64.93B | $63.31B | $61.16B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-79M | $504M | $18.25B | $7.49B | $4.23B |
| Gross Margin | -5.6% | 76.2% | 74.2% | 69.3% | 70.2% |
| Operating Margin | -43.4% | 14.8% | 41.1% | 23.4% | 26.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | 11.9x | 21.9x | 8.9x | 14.3x |
| Total Debt | $58M | $269M | $50.53B | $67.42B | $69.07B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $73M | $551M | $14.56B | $1.14B | $5.23B |
MIST vs INVA vs MRK vs PFE vs ABBV — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Milestone Pharmaceu… (MIST) | 100 | 59.8 | -40.2% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 163.2 | +63.2% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 145.9 | +45.9% |
| Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | 100 | 73.1 | -26.9% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 218.7 | +118.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MIST vs INVA vs MRK vs PFE vs ABBV
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MIST is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +46.5% vs ABBV's +11.3%
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
- 18.5% revenue growth vs MIST's -93.9%
MRK ranks third and is worth considering specifically for valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.03 vs INVA's 1.15
- Better valuation composite
PFE is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.54, yield 6.5%
- 6.5% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ABBV's 3.2%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
ABBV is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 295.5% 10Y total return vs MRK's 166.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.5% revenue growth vs MIST's -93.9% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs MIST's -55.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.13 vs MIST's 2.11, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 6.5% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ABBV's 3.2%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +46.5% vs ABBV's +11.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.4% ROA vs MIST's -102.2%, ROIC 14.2% vs -133.7% |
MIST vs INVA vs MRK vs PFE vs ABBV — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
MIST vs INVA vs MRK vs PFE vs ABBV — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INVA leads in 4 of 6 categories
PFE leads 1 • MIST leads 0 • MRK leads 0 • ABBV leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK is the larger business by revenue, generating $64.9B annually — 45213.1x MIST's $1M. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to MIST's -55.3%. On growth, INVA holds the edge at +10.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1M | $424M | $64.9B | $63.3B | $61.2B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$62M | $86M | $32.4B | $21.0B | $24.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$79M | $504M | $18.3B | $7.5B | $4.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$49M | $181M | $12.4B | $9.5B | $18.7B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -5.6% | +76.2% | +74.2% | +69.3% | +70.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -43.4% | +14.8% | +41.1% | +23.4% | +26.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -55.3% | +118.9% | +28.1% | +11.8% | +6.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -34.2% | +42.8% | +19.0% | +15.0% | +30.6% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +10.6% | +4.5% | +5.4% | +10.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +25.0% | +4.0% | -19.6% | -9.5% | +57.4% |
Valuation Metrics
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 92% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), INVA offers better value at 0.67x vs MRK's 0.73x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $201M | $1.9B | $277.3B | $150.6B | $358.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $186M | $1.7B | $313.3B | $216.9B | $422.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.52x | 6.91x | 15.42x | 19.47x | 85.50x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 11.91x | 21.93x | 8.94x | 14.28x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.67x | 0.73x | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 8.10x | 10.68x | 10.66x | 14.96x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 129.88x | 4.55x | 4.27x | 2.41x | 5.86x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.80x | 1.65x | 5.35x | 1.74x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 9.88x | 22.44x | 16.60x | 20.12x |
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA 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 $-8 for MIST. INVA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.23x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MIST's 1.40x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PFE scores 7/9 vs MIST's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -8.3% | +46.5% | +36.1% | +8.3% | +62.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -102.2% | +32.4% | +14.6% | +3.6% | +3.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -133.7% | +14.2% | +22.0% | +7.5% | +23.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -74.4% | +12.4% | +23.8% | +9.0% | +21.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.40x | 0.23x | 0.96x | 0.78x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$15M | -$282M | $36.0B | $66.3B | $63.8B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $73M | $551M | $14.6B | $1.1B | $5.2B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $58M | $269M | $50.5B | $67.4B | $69.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -5.71x | 63.45x | 19.68x | 4.02x | 3.28x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
INVA 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 $3,298 for MIST. Over the past 12 months, MIST leads with a +46.5% total return vs ABBV's +11.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors INVA at 25.0% vs MIST's -21.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -7.8% | +14.7% | +6.3% | +6.9% | -10.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +46.5% | +21.7% | +46.1% | +23.7% | +11.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -51.8% | +95.2% | +2.9% | -18.4% | +50.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -67.0% | +94.4% | +70.2% | -13.3% | +101.3% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -87.7% | +94.9% | +166.5% | +29.6% | +295.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -21.6% | +25.0% | +0.9% | -6.6% | +14.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — INVA and PFE 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 MIST's 2.11 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PFE currently trades 92.1% from its 52-week high vs MIST's 61.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.11x | 0.13x | 0.48x | 0.54x | 0.34x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.06 | $25.15 | $125.14 | $28.75 | $244.81 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.00 | $16.52 | $73.31 | $21.97 | $176.57 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +61.8% | +90.7% | +89.7% | +92.1% | +82.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 58.2 | 39.9 | 46.7 | 44.2 | 46.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 2.1M | 621K | 7.3M | 33.3M | 5.8M |
Analyst Outlook
PFE leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MIST as "Buy", INVA as "Buy", MRK as "Buy", PFE as "Hold", ABBV as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 287.8% upside for MIST (target: $7) vs 3.0% for PFE (target: $27). For income investors, PFE offers the higher dividend yield at 6.49% vs MRK's 2.90%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $7.33 | $37.67 | $129.31 | $27.27 | $256.64 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 10 | 37 | 39 | 41 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.9% | +6.5% | +3.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 14 | 15 | 13 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $3.26 | $1.72 | $6.57 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.2% | +1.8% | 0.0% | +0.3% |
INVA leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). PFE leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.
MIST vs INVA vs MRK vs PFE vs ABBV: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MIST or INVA or MRK or PFE or ABBV a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the stronger pick with 18. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). 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 Milestone Pharmaceuticals Inc. (MIST) a "Buy" — based on 7 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 — MIST or INVA or MRK or PFE or ABBV?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 5x. On forward P/E, Pfizer Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 9x — 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: Merck & Co. , Inc. wins at 1. 03x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 1. 15x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MIST or INVA or MRK or PFE or ABBV?
Over the past 5 years, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) delivered a total return of +101. 3%, compared to -67. 0% for Milestone Pharmaceuticals Inc. (MIST). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABBV returned +295. 5% versus MIST's -87. 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 — MIST or INVA or MRK or PFE or ABBV?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 13β versus Milestone Pharmaceuticals Inc. 's 2. 11β — meaning MIST is approximately 1574% more volatile than INVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 23% versus 140% for Milestone Pharmaceuticals Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MIST or INVA or MRK or PFE or ABBV?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is pulling ahead at 18. 5% versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to -11. 9% for Milestone Pharmaceuticals Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, INVA leads at 8. 7% 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 — MIST or INVA or MRK or PFE or ABBV?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -55. 3% for Milestone Pharmaceuticals Inc. — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INVA leads at 38. 5% versus -40. 2% for MIST. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — INVA leads at 72. 3%, 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 MIST or INVA or MRK or PFE or ABBV 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, Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 03x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 1. 15x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Pfizer Inc. (PFE) trades at 8. 9x forward P/E versus 21. 9x for Merck & Co. , Inc. — 13. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MIST: 287. 8% to $7. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — MIST or INVA or MRK or PFE or ABBV?
In this comparison, PFE (6.
5% yield), ABBV (3. 2% yield), MRK (2. 9% yield) pay a dividend. MIST, INVA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is MIST or INVA or MRK or PFE or ABBV 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). Milestone Pharmaceuticals Inc. (MIST) carries a higher beta of 2. 11 — 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%, MIST: -87. 7%), 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 MIST and INVA and MRK and PFE and ABBV?
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: MIST is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock; PFE is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; ABBV is a large-cap income-oriented stock. MRK, PFE, ABBV pay a dividend while MIST, 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.