Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
NAMS vs MDGL vs MRK vs ARWR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Biotechnology
NAMS vs MDGL vs MRK vs ARWR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $4.14B | $12.07B | $275.10B | $10.80B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $23M | $1.13B | $64.93B | $622M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-213M | $-309M | $18.25B | $-301M |
| Gross Margin | 97.5% | 93.1% | 74.2% | 99.0% |
| Operating Margin | -9.5% | -27.7% | 41.1% | -35.7% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 21.7x | — |
| Total Debt | $202K | $354M | $50.53B | $366M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $490M | $199M | $14.56B | $227M |
NAMS vs MDGL vs MRK vs ARWR — 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% |
| Madrigal Pharmaceut… (MDGL) | 100 | 432.1 | +332.1% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 160.9 | +60.9% |
| Arrowhead Pharmaceu… (ARWR) | 100 | 96.2 | -3.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NAMS vs MDGL vs MRK vs ARWR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NAMS is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.44, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 7.88x
- Beta 1.44, current ratio 7.88x
MDGL is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 37.4% 10Y total return vs NAMS's 234.0%
MRK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 14 yrs, beta 0.38, yield 2.9%
- Better valuation composite
- 28.1% margin vs NAMS's -9.4%
- Beta 0.38 vs ARWR's 1.70
ARWR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 232.6%, EPS growth 99.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 50.5%
- 232.6% revenue growth vs NAMS's -50.6%
- +399.8% vs MRK's +53.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 232.6% revenue growth vs NAMS's -50.6% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 28.1% margin vs NAMS's -9.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.38 vs ARWR's 1.70 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield; 14-year raise streak; the other 3 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +399.8% vs MRK's +53.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 14.6% ROA vs NAMS's -27.4%, ROIC 22.0% vs -188.2% |
NAMS vs MDGL vs MRK vs ARWR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
NAMS vs MDGL vs MRK vs ARWR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MRK leads in 4 of 6 categories
NAMS leads 0 • MDGL leads 0 • ARWR leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK is the larger business by revenue, generating $64.9B annually — 2877.3x NAMS's $23M. MRK is the more profitable business, keeping 28.1% 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 | $1.1B | $64.9B | $622M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$215M | -$312M | $32.4B | -$197M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$213M | -$309M | $18.3B | -$301M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$142M | -$272M | $12.4B | -$51M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +97.5% | +93.1% | +74.2% | +99.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -9.5% | -27.7% | +41.1% | -35.7% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -9.4% | -27.3% | +28.1% | -48.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -6.3% | -24.1% | +19.0% | -8.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.1% | +126.8% | +4.5% | -86.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -17.6% | +2.1% | -19.6% | -133.8% |
Valuation Metrics
MRK leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, MRK's 10.6x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ARWR's 89.5x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $4.1B | $12.1B | $275.1B | $10.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.7B | $12.2B | $311.1B | $10.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -20.25x | -40.75x | 15.30x | -6284.43x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 21.68x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.72x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 10.61x | 89.47x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 184.11x | 12.60x | 4.24x | 13.02x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 5.93x | 19.49x | 5.30x | 20.37x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 22.26x | 68.84x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MRK leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MRK delivers a 36.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $36 in annual profit, vs $-55 for ARWR. NAMS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MRK's 0.96x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ARWR scores 6/9 vs MDGL's 3/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -29.8% | -50.2% | +36.1% | -55.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -27.4% | -25.4% | +14.6% | -18.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -188.2% | -29.4% | +22.0% | +9.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -31.3% | -32.9% | +23.8% | +8.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.00x | 0.59x | 0.96x | 0.73x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$490M | $156M | $36.0B | $140M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $490M | $199M | $14.6B | $227M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $202,000 | $354M | $50.5B | $366M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -25.80x | 19.68x | -2.03x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — NAMS and MDGL and ARWR each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MDGL five years ago would be worth $39,081 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $10,496 for ARWR. Over the past 12 months, ARWR leads with a +399.8% total return vs MRK's +53.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NAMS at 42.2% vs MRK's 1.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +0.7% | -11.8% | +5.4% | +13.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +89.5% | +79.5% | +53.3% | +399.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +187.3% | +80.4% | +3.9% | +92.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +260.9% | +290.8% | +65.9% | +5.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +234.0% | +3736.6% | +162.0% | +1406.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +42.2% | +21.7% | +1.3% | +24.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — MRK and ARWR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MRK is the less volatile stock with a 0.38 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ARWR's 1.70 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ARWR currently trades 93.5% from its 52-week high vs NAMS's 84.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.44x | 0.62x | 0.38x | 1.70x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $42.20 | $615.00 | $125.14 | $82.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $16.79 | $265.00 | $73.31 | $14.30 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +84.0% | +85.2% | +89.0% | +93.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 60.9 | 58.6 | 48.2 | 63.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 310K | 6.7M | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
MRK leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NAMS as "Buy", MDGL as "Buy", MRK as "Buy", ARWR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 36.0% upside for MDGL (target: $712) vs 9.0% for ARWR (target: $84). MRK is the only dividend payer here at 2.93% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $46.00 | $712.00 | $129.31 | $83.56 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 23 | 37 | 20 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.9% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | 14 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $3.26 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +1.8% | 0.0% |
MRK leads in 4 of 6 categories — strongest in Income & Cash Flow and Valuation Metrics. 2 categories are tied.
NAMS vs MDGL vs MRK vs ARWR: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NAMS or MDGL or MRK or ARWR 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 -50. 6% for NewAmsterdam Pharma Company N. V. (NAMS). Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) offers the better valuation at 15. 3x trailing P/E (21. 7x 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 is the better long-term investment — NAMS or MDGL or MRK or ARWR?
Over the past 5 years, Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(MDGL) delivered a total return of +290. 8%, compared to +5. 0% for Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (ARWR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MDGL returned +37. 4% versus MRK's +162. 0%. 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 — NAMS or MDGL or MRK or ARWR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 38β versus Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 1. 70β — meaning ARWR is approximately 341% more volatile than MRK 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 96% for Merck & Co. , Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — NAMS or MDGL or MRK or ARWR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(ARWR) is pulling ahead at 232. 6% versus -50. 6% for NewAmsterdam Pharma Company N. V. (NAMS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. grew EPS 99. 8% year-over-year, compared to 8. 0% for Merck & Co. , 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 — NAMS or MDGL or MRK or ARWR?
Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the more profitable company, earning 28. 1% net margin versus -905. 7% for NewAmsterdam Pharma Company N. V. — meaning it keeps 28. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: MRK leads at 36. 2% versus -1002. 9% for NAMS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ARWR leads at 100. 0%, 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 NAMS or MDGL or MRK or ARWR more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MDGL: 36.
0% to $712. 00.
07Which pays a better dividend — NAMS or MDGL or MRK or ARWR?
In this comparison, MRK (2.
9% yield) pays a dividend. NAMS, MDGL, ARWR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is NAMS or MDGL or MRK or ARWR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Merck & Co.
, Inc. (MRK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 38), 2. 9% yield, +162. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MRK: +162. 0%, NAMS: +234. 0%), 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 NAMS and MDGL and MRK and ARWR?
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; MDGL is a mid-cap high-growth stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock; ARWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock. MRK pays a dividend while NAMS, MDGL, ARWR 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.