Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
NERV vs ALTO vs JPM vs BAC vs ACAD
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Banks - Diversified
Banks - Diversified
Biotechnology
NERV vs ALTO vs JPM vs BAC vs ACAD — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Chemicals - Specialty | Banks - Diversified | Banks - Diversified | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $32M | $441M | $896.00B | $422.78B | $3.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $916M | $280.33B | $191.57B | $1.10B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-415M | $29M | $57.05B | $30.51B | $376M |
| Gross Margin | — | 5.0% | 60.0% | 56.1% | 91.5% |
| Operating Margin | — | 2.1% | 25.9% | 19.7% | 7.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | 13.4x | 14.4x | 12.6x | 54.2x |
| Total Debt | $65M | $98M | $942.38B | $365.90B | $52M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $82M | $26M | $343.34B | $231.84B | $178M |
NERV vs ALTO vs JPM vs BAC vs ACAD — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Minerva Neuroscienc… (NERV) | 100 | 15.6 | -84.4% |
| Alto Ingredients, I… (ALTO) | 100 | 802.8 | +702.8% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
| Bank of America Cor… (BAC) | 100 | 235.9 | +135.9% |
| ACADIA Pharmaceutic… (ACAD) | 100 | 43.5 | -56.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NERV vs ALTO vs JPM vs BAC vs ACAD
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NERV is the clearest fit if your priority is growth.
- 121.0% revenue growth vs ALTO's -4.9%
ALTO has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.23, Low D/E 39.8%, current ratio 2.64x
- Beta 0.23 vs NERV's 1.28
- +418.2% vs ACAD's -3.0%
JPM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding and valuation efficiency is your priority.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs BAC's 368.2%
- PEG 0.81 vs BAC's 0.82
- NIM 2.2% vs BAC's 1.8%
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 54.2x)
BAC is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 12 yrs, beta 0.86, yield 2.3%
- Beta 0.86, yield 2.3%, current ratio 0.42x
ACAD ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 11.9%, EPS growth 68.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 27.5%
- 34.3% margin vs ALTO's 3.2%
- 26.2% ROA vs NERV's -6.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 121.0% revenue growth vs ALTO's -4.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 54.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 34.3% margin vs ALTO's 3.2% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.23 vs NERV's 1.28 | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs BAC's 2.3%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +418.2% vs ACAD's -3.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 26.2% ROA vs NERV's -6.6% |
NERV vs ALTO vs JPM vs BAC vs ACAD — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
NERV vs ALTO vs JPM vs BAC vs ACAD — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ACAD leads in 2 of 6 categories
BAC leads 1 • JPM leads 1 • NERV leads 0 • ALTO leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ACAD leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM and NERV operate at a comparable scale, with $280.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. ACAD is the more profitable business, keeping 34.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ALTO's 3.2%. On growth, ACAD holds the edge at +9.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $916M | $280.3B | $191.6B | $1.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$28M | $38M | $81.4B | $40.0B | $96M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$415M | $29M | $57.0B | $30.5B | $376M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$5.4B | $31M | $100.9B | $12.6B | $212M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +5.0% | +60.0% | +56.1% | +91.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +2.1% | +25.9% | +19.7% | +7.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +3.2% | +20.4% | +15.9% | +34.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +3.4% | +36.0% | +6.6% | +19.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -0.8% | — | — | +9.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +131.3% | +16.0% | +18.3% | -81.8% |
Valuation Metrics
BAC leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 9.2x trailing earnings, ACAD trades at a 74% valuation discount to ALTO's 35.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs BAC's 0.95x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $32M | $441M | $896.0B | $422.8B | $3.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $14M | $512M | $1.50T | $556.8B | $3.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.13x | 35.63x | 16.00x | 14.66x | 9.21x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 13.41x | 14.40x | 12.56x | 54.20x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 0.90x | 0.95x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 15.57x | 18.36x | 13.92x | 25.09x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 0.48x | 3.20x | 2.21x | 3.37x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 1.76x | 2.47x | 1.39x | 2.94x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 50.94x | 8.88x | 33.52x | 34.34x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ACAD leads this category, winning 7 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ACAD delivers a 35.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $36 in annual profit, vs $10 for BAC. ACAD carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), BAC scores 7/9 vs NERV's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | — | +12.5% | +15.9% | +10.1% | +35.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -6.6% | +7.4% | +1.3% | +0.9% | +26.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | +1.9% | +4.5% | +3.5% | +10.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -23.2% | +2.3% | +8.9% | +4.5% | +10.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.40x | 2.60x | 1.21x | 0.04x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$17M | $72M | $599.0B | $134.1B | -$126M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $82M | $26M | $343.3B | $231.8B | $178M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $65M | $98M | $942.4B | $365.9B | $52M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 0.24x | 0.74x | 0.48x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in JPM five years ago would be worth $21,820 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,905 for NERV. Over the past 12 months, ALTO leads with a +418.2% total return vs ACAD's -3.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs NERV's -12.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +15.1% | +114.3% | -0.5% | +1.1% | -19.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +152.0% | +418.2% | +21.8% | +28.1% | -3.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -32.2% | +128.9% | +138.2% | +103.0% | -14.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -81.0% | -9.2% | +118.2% | +47.1% | -22.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -94.4% | +2.3% | +465.8% | +368.2% | -44.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -12.1% | +31.8% | +33.6% | +26.6% | -5.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ALTO and BAC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ALTO is the less volatile stock with a 0.23 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NERV's 1.28 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. BAC currently trades 97.3% from its 52-week high vs NERV's 36.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.28x | 0.23x | 0.94x | 0.86x | 1.10x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $12.46 | $5.99 | $337.25 | $57.55 | $27.81 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.57 | $0.92 | $262.71 | $43.66 | $19.69 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +36.2% | +95.2% | +95.1% | +97.3% | +75.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 37.4 | 58.9 | 59.1 | 68.3 | 47.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 154K | 2.0M | 7.0M | 31.7M | 1.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — JPM and BAC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NERV as "Buy", ALTO as "Buy", JPM as "Buy", BAC as "Buy", ACAD as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 75.4% upside for ALTO (target: $10) vs 5.9% for JPM (target: $340). For income investors, BAC offers the higher dividend yield at 2.26% vs ALTO's 0.29%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $5.00 | $10.00 | $339.75 | $61.13 | $34.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 7 | 2 | 61 | 54 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.3% | +1.9% | +2.3% | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 15 | 12 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.02 | $5.95 | $1.27 | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.9% | +5.1% | 0.0% |
ACAD leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). BAC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 2 tied.
NERV vs ALTO vs JPM vs BAC vs ACAD: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NERV or ALTO or JPM or BAC or ACAD a better buy right now?
For growth investors, ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(ACAD) is the stronger pick with 11. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 9% for Alto Ingredients, Inc. (ALTO). ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. (ACAD) offers the better valuation at 9. 2x trailing P/E (54. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Minerva Neurosciences, Inc. (NERV) 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 — NERV or ALTO or JPM or BAC or ACAD?
On trailing P/E, ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(ACAD) is the cheapest at 9. 2x versus Alto Ingredients, Inc. at 35. 6x. On forward P/E, Bank of America Corporation is actually cheaper at 12. 6x — 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: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus Bank of America Corporation's 0. 82x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NERV or ALTO or JPM or BAC or ACAD?
Over the past 5 years, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) delivered a total return of +118. 2%, compared to -81. 0% for Minerva Neurosciences, Inc. (NERV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus NERV's -94. 4%. 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 — NERV or ALTO or JPM or BAC or ACAD?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Alto Ingredients, Inc.
(ALTO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 23β versus Minerva Neurosciences, Inc. 's 1. 28β — meaning NERV is approximately 463% more volatile than ALTO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. (ACAD) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NERV or ALTO or JPM or BAC or ACAD?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(ACAD) is pulling ahead at 11. 9% versus -4. 9% for Alto Ingredients, Inc. (ALTO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Alto Ingredients, Inc. grew EPS 119. 5% year-over-year, compared to -183. 5% for Minerva Neurosciences, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ACAD leads at 27. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — NERV or ALTO or JPM or BAC or ACAD?
ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(ACAD) is the more profitable company, earning 36. 5% net margin versus 0. 0% for Minerva Neurosciences, Inc. — meaning it keeps 36. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 26. 0% versus 0. 0% for NERV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ACAD leads at 91. 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 NERV or ALTO or JPM or BAC or ACAD 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus Bank of America Corporation's 0. 82x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) trades at 12. 6x forward P/E versus 54. 2x for ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. — 41. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ALTO: 75. 4% to $10. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — NERV or ALTO or JPM or BAC or ACAD?
In this comparison, BAC (2.
3% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield), ALTO (0. 3% yield) pay a dividend. NERV, ACAD do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NERV or ALTO or JPM or BAC or ACAD better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Bank of America Corporation (BAC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
86), 2. 3% yield, +368. 2% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (BAC: +368. 2%, NERV: -94. 4%), 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 NERV and ALTO and JPM and BAC and ACAD?
These companies operate in different sectors (NERV (Healthcare) and ALTO (Basic Materials) and JPM (Financial Services) and BAC (Financial Services) and ACAD (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: NERV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ALTO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock; BAC is a large-cap deep-value stock; ACAD is a small-cap deep-value stock. JPM, BAC pay a dividend while NERV, ALTO, ACAD 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.