Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NAMS vs ESPR vs MDGL vs LNTH vs PFE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Drug Manufacturers - General
NAMS vs ESPR vs MDGL vs LNTH vs PFE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $4.14B | $649M | $12.07B | $6.11B | $144.09B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $23M | $418M | $1.13B | $1.55B | $63.31B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-213M | $-7M | $-309M | $279M | $7.49B |
| Gross Margin | 97.5% | 54.1% | 93.1% | 60.5% | 69.3% |
| Operating Margin | -9.5% | 18.1% | -27.7% | 18.8% | 23.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 17.6x | 8.5x |
| Total Debt | $202K | $548M | $354M | $738K | $67.42B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $490M | $168M | $199M | $359M | $1.14B |
NAMS vs ESPR vs MDGL vs LNTH vs PFE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Feb 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| NewAmsterdam Pharma… (NAMS) | 100 | 346.8 | +246.8% |
| Esperion Therapeuti… (ESPR) | 100 | 11.4 | -88.6% |
| Madrigal Pharmaceut… (MDGL) | 100 | 432.1 | +332.1% |
| Lantheus Holdings, … (LNTH) | 100 | 502.7 | +402.7% |
| Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | 100 | 75.6 | -24.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NAMS vs ESPR vs MDGL vs LNTH vs PFE
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, NAMS doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ESPR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 21.3%, EPS growth 60.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 74.8%
- +301.4% vs LNTH's +17.7%
MDGL is the clearest fit if your priority is growth.
- 432.1% revenue growth vs NAMS's -50.6%
LNTH is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- 39.8% 10Y total return vs MDGL's 37.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.57, Low D/E 0.1%, current ratio 2.70x
- 18.0% margin vs NAMS's -9.4%
- 12.4% ROA vs NAMS's -27.4%, ROIC 30.6% vs -188.2%
PFE carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.45, yield 6.8%
- Beta 0.45, yield 6.8%, current ratio 1.16x
- Lower P/E (8.5x vs 17.6x)
- Beta 0.45 vs ESPR's 2.32
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 432.1% revenue growth vs NAMS's -50.6% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.5x vs 17.6x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 18.0% margin vs NAMS's -9.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.45 vs ESPR's 2.32 | |
| Dividends | 6.8% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +301.4% vs LNTH's +17.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.4% ROA vs NAMS's -27.4%, ROIC 30.6% vs -188.2% |
NAMS vs ESPR vs MDGL vs LNTH vs PFE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
NAMS vs ESPR vs MDGL vs LNTH vs PFE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
LNTH leads in 2 of 6 categories
PFE leads 2 • NAMS leads 0 • ESPR leads 0 • MDGL leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
LNTH leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
PFE is the larger business by revenue, generating $63.3B annually — 2805.9x NAMS's $23M. LNTH is the more profitable business, keeping 18.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NAMS's -9.4%. On growth, MDGL holds the edge at +126.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $23M | $418M | $1.1B | $1.5B | $63.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$215M | $76M | -$312M | $347M | $21.0B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$213M | -$7M | -$309M | $279M | $7.5B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$142M | -$18M | -$272M | $372M | $9.5B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +97.5% | +54.1% | +93.1% | +60.5% | +69.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -9.5% | +18.1% | -27.7% | +18.8% | +23.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -9.4% | -1.8% | -27.3% | +18.0% | +11.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -6.3% | -4.3% | -24.1% | +24.0% | +15.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.1% | +23.2% | +126.8% | +1.2% | +5.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -17.6% | +52.4% | +2.1% | +76.5% | -9.5% |
Valuation Metrics
PFE leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 18.6x trailing earnings, PFE trades at a 32% valuation discount to LNTH's 27.5x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, PFE's 10.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ESPR's 17.0x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.1B | $649M | $12.1B | $6.1B | $144.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.7B | $1.0B | $12.2B | $5.8B | $210.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -20.25x | -28.36x | -40.75x | 27.54x | 18.63x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 17.61x | 8.54x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 17.04x | — | 15.11x | 10.34x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 184.11x | 1.61x | 12.60x | 3.97x | 2.30x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 5.93x | — | 19.49x | 5.90x | 1.66x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 17.27x | 15.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — NAMS and LNTH each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
LNTH delivers a 24.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $24 in annual profit, vs $-50 for MDGL. NAMS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PFE's 0.78x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PFE scores 7/9 vs MDGL's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -29.8% | — | -50.2% | +24.3% | +8.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -27.4% | -1.8% | -25.4% | +12.4% | +3.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -188.2% | +66.5% | -29.4% | +30.6% | +7.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -31.3% | +45.9% | -32.9% | +17.1% | +9.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | — | 0.59x | 0.00x | 0.78x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$490M | $380M | $156M | -$358M | $66.3B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $490M | $168M | $199M | $359M | $1.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $202,000 | $548M | $354M | $738,000 | $67.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 1.84x | -25.80x | 15.83x | 4.02x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
LNTH leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in LNTH five years ago would be worth $44,698 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,495 for ESPR. Over the past 12 months, ESPR leads with a +301.4% total return vs LNTH's +17.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NAMS at 42.2% vs PFE's -6.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +0.7% | -15.9% | -11.8% | +39.6% | +4.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +89.5% | +301.4% | +79.5% | +17.7% | +19.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +187.3% | +83.5% | +80.4% | -5.3% | -18.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +260.9% | -85.1% | +290.8% | +347.0% | -16.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +234.0% | -79.9% | +3736.6% | +3983.0% | +28.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +42.2% | +22.4% | +21.7% | -1.8% | -6.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — LNTH and PFE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PFE is the less volatile stock with a 0.45 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ESPR's 2.32 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. LNTH currently trades 95.6% from its 52-week high vs ESPR's 74.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.44x | 2.32x | 0.62x | 0.57x | 0.45x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $42.20 | $4.18 | $615.00 | $98.27 | $28.75 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $16.79 | $0.69 | $265.00 | $47.25 | $22.09 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +84.0% | +74.6% | +85.2% | +95.6% | +88.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.9 | 71.4 | 58.6 | 76.9 | 37.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 12.4M | 310K | 858K | 32.6M |
Analyst Outlook
PFE leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NAMS as "Buy", ESPR as "Hold", MDGL as "Buy", LNTH as "Buy", PFE as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 36.0% upside for MDGL (target: $712) vs 2.2% for ESPR (target: $3). PFE is the only dividend payer here at 6.78% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $46.00 | $3.19 | $712.00 | $103.50 | $27.60 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 25 | 23 | 17 | 39 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +6.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 1 | 0 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $1.72 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.9% | 0.0% |
LNTH leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). PFE leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 2 tied.
NAMS vs ESPR vs MDGL vs LNTH vs PFE: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NAMS or ESPR or MDGL or LNTH or PFE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(MDGL) is the stronger pick with 432. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -50. 6% for NewAmsterdam Pharma Company N. V. (NAMS). Pfizer Inc. (PFE) offers the better valuation at 18. 6x trailing P/E (8. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate NewAmsterdam Pharma Company N. V. (NAMS) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — NAMS or ESPR or MDGL or LNTH or PFE?
On trailing P/E, Pfizer Inc.
(PFE) is the cheapest at 18. 6x versus Lantheus Holdings, Inc. at 27. 5x. On forward P/E, Pfizer Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 5x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NAMS or ESPR or MDGL or LNTH or PFE?
Over the past 5 years, Lantheus Holdings, Inc.
(LNTH) delivered a total return of +347. 0%, compared to -85. 1% for Esperion Therapeutics, Inc. (ESPR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: LNTH returned +39. 8% versus ESPR's -79. 9%. 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 — NAMS or ESPR or MDGL or LNTH or PFE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Pfizer Inc.
(PFE) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 45β versus Esperion Therapeutics, Inc. 's 2. 32β — meaning ESPR is approximately 419% more volatile than PFE relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, NewAmsterdam Pharma Company N. V. (NAMS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 78% for Pfizer Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NAMS or ESPR or MDGL or LNTH or PFE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(MDGL) is pulling ahead at 432. 1% versus -50. 6% for NewAmsterdam Pharma Company N. V. (NAMS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Esperion Therapeutics, Inc. grew EPS 60. 7% year-over-year, compared to -21. 8% for Lantheus Holdings, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ESPR leads at 74. 8% 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 — NAMS or ESPR or MDGL or LNTH or PFE?
Lantheus Holdings, Inc.
(LNTH) is the more profitable company, earning 15. 2% net margin versus -905. 7% for NewAmsterdam Pharma Company N. V. — meaning it keeps 15. 2% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: PFE leads at 24. 7% versus -1002. 9% for NAMS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NAMS leads at 99. 7%, 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 NAMS or ESPR or MDGL or LNTH or PFE more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Pfizer Inc.
(PFE) trades at 8. 5x forward P/E versus 17. 6x for Lantheus Holdings, Inc. — 9. 1x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MDGL: 36. 0% to $712. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — NAMS or ESPR or MDGL or LNTH or PFE?
In this comparison, PFE (6.
8% yield) pays a dividend. NAMS, ESPR, MDGL, LNTH do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NAMS or ESPR or MDGL or LNTH or PFE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Pfizer Inc.
(PFE) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 45), 6. 8% yield). Esperion Therapeutics, Inc. (ESPR) carries a higher beta of 2. 32 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (PFE: +28. 2%, ESPR: -79. 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.
10What are the main differences between NAMS and ESPR and MDGL and LNTH and PFE?
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: NAMS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ESPR is a small-cap high-growth stock; MDGL is a mid-cap high-growth stock; LNTH is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PFE is a mid-cap income-oriented stock. PFE pays a dividend while NAMS, ESPR, MDGL, LNTH 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.