Medical - Pharmaceuticals
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
NEUP vs INVA vs ACAD vs PRGO vs MCK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Medical - Distribution
NEUP vs INVA vs ACAD vs PRGO vs MCK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Pharmaceuticals | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Medical - Distribution |
| Market Cap | $23M | $1.66B | $3.70B | $1.42B | $90.23B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $-10M | $424M | $1.10B | $4.18B | $403.43B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-28M | $504M | $376M | $-1.82B | $4.76B |
| Gross Margin | 100.0% | 76.2% | 91.5% | 34.2% | 3.6% |
| Operating Margin | -7.2% | 14.8% | 7.4% | -4.1% | 1.6% |
| Forward P/E | — | 6.3x | 55.6x | 4.8x | 17.0x |
| Total Debt | $226K | $269M | $52M | $3.97B | $8.61B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $22M | $551M | $178M | $532M | $3.98B |
NEUP vs INVA vs ACAD vs PRGO vs MCK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Dec 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neuphoria Therapeut… (NEUP) | 100 | 2.9 | -97.1% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 130.4 | +30.4% |
| ACADIA Pharmaceutic… (ACAD) | 100 | 92.6 | -7.4% |
| Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) | 100 | 26.3 | -73.7% |
| McKesson Corporation (MCK) | 100 | 302.0 | +202.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NEUP vs INVA vs ACAD vs PRGO vs MCK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NEUP plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
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 0.03, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 14.64x
- Beta 0.03, current ratio 14.64x
- 18.5% revenue growth vs NEUP's -140.1%
ACAD lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
PRGO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 23 yrs, beta 1.11, yield 11.2%
- Lower P/E (4.8x vs 17.0x)
- 11.2% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs MCK's 0.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
MCK is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 328.4% 10Y total return vs INVA's 101.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.5% revenue growth vs NEUP's -140.1% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (4.8x vs 17.0x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs PRGO's -43.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.03 vs NEUP's 1.38 | |
| Dividends | 11.2% yield, 23-year raise streak, vs MCK's 0.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +4.8% vs PRGO's -56.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.4% ROA vs NEUP's -77.5%, ROIC 14.2% vs -13.4% |
NEUP vs INVA vs ACAD vs PRGO vs MCK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
NEUP vs INVA vs ACAD vs PRGO vs MCK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INVA leads in 2 of 6 categories
NEUP leads 1 • MCK leads 1 • PRGO leads 1 • ACAD 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)
MCK and NEUP operate at a comparable scale, with $403.4B and -$10M in trailing revenue. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PRGO's -43.5%. On growth, INVA holds the edge at +10.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | -$10M | $424M | $1.1B | $4.2B | $403.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$25M | $86M | $96M | $58M | $7.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$28M | $504M | $376M | -$1.8B | $4.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $59M | $181M | $212M | $108M | $5.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +100.0% | +76.2% | +91.5% | +34.2% | +3.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -7.2% | +14.8% | +7.4% | -4.1% | +1.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -2.4% | +118.9% | +34.3% | -43.5% | +1.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.9% | +42.6% | +19.4% | +2.6% | +1.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | +10.6% | +9.7% | -7.2% | +6.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -101.4% | +4.0% | -81.8% | -56.4% | +37.0% |
Valuation Metrics
NEUP leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.8x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 65% valuation discount to MCK's 19.6x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, INVA's 6.8x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ACAD's 25.7x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $23M | $1.7B | $3.7B | $1.4B | $90.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2M | $1.4B | $3.6B | $4.9B | $94.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -18.74x | 6.82x | 9.44x | -1.00x | 19.56x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 6.29x | 55.56x | 4.84x | 16.96x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.66x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 6.76x | 25.75x | 7.13x | 13.21x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1.49x | 3.90x | 3.45x | 0.33x | 0.22x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.24x | 1.63x | 3.02x | 0.48x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 0.30x | 8.48x | 35.20x | 9.77x | 15.78x |
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA delivers a 47.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $48 in annual profit, vs $-110 for NEUP. NEUP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PRGO's 1.35x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NEUP scores 8/9 vs PRGO's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -109.7% | +47.6% | +35.6% | -50.7% | — |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -77.5% | +32.4% | +26.2% | -19.8% | +5.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -13.4% | +14.2% | +10.0% | +3.7% | +2.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -3.7% | +12.4% | +10.1% | +4.3% | +44.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 8 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.23x | 0.04x | 1.35x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$21M | -$282M | -$126M | $3.4B | $4.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $22M | $551M | $178M | $532M | $4.0B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $226,487 | $269M | $52M | $4.0B | $8.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 63.45x | — | -7.20x | 51.78x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MCK leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MCK five years ago would be worth $41,282 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $244 for NEUP. Over the past 12 months, INVA leads with a +4.8% total return vs PRGO's -56.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MCK at 22.8% vs NEUP's -47.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +12.8% | +13.2% | -17.3% | -22.0% | -8.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -34.9% | +4.8% | -5.8% | -56.6% | +3.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -85.8% | +75.4% | -9.3% | -59.8% | +85.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.6% | +68.7% | -16.9% | -66.1% | +312.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.6% | +101.2% | -42.2% | -79.7% | +328.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -47.9% | +20.6% | -3.2% | -26.2% | +22.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — INVA and MCK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MCK is the less volatile stock with a -0.11 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NEUP's 1.38 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. INVA currently trades 89.4% from its 52-week high vs NEUP's 20.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.38x | 0.03x | 1.08x | 1.11x | -0.11x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $21.40 | $25.15 | $27.81 | $28.44 | $999.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.65 | $16.52 | $19.69 | $9.23 | $637.00 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +20.1% | +89.4% | +77.7% | +36.0% | +75.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 36.3 | 52.6 | 51.4 | 38.6 | 51.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 48K | 677K | 1.4M | 2.5M | 906K |
Analyst Outlook
PRGO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: INVA as "Buy", ACAD as "Buy", PRGO as "Hold", MCK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 253.2% upside for PRGO (target: $36) vs 32.5% for MCK (target: $995). For income investors, PRGO offers the higher dividend yield at 11.22% vs MCK's 0.41%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $37.00 | $33.67 | $36.20 | $994.86 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 10 | 37 | 36 | 31 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +11.2% | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 2 | — | 23 | 18 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $1.15 | $3.07 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +5.3% |
INVA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NEUP leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
NEUP vs INVA vs ACAD vs PRGO vs MCK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NEUP or INVA or ACAD or PRGO or MCK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the stronger pick with 18. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 8% for Perrigo Company plc (PRGO). Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) offers the better valuation at 6. 8x trailing P/E (6. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) 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 — NEUP or INVA or ACAD or PRGO or MCK?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 8x versus McKesson Corporation at 19. 6x. On forward P/E, Perrigo Company plc is actually cheaper at 4. 8x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NEUP or INVA or ACAD or PRGO or MCK?
Over the past 5 years, McKesson Corporation (MCK) delivered a total return of +312.
8%, compared to -97. 6% for Neuphoria Therapeutics Inc. (NEUP). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MCK returned +328. 4% versus NEUP's -97. 6%. 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 — NEUP or INVA or ACAD or PRGO or MCK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
11β versus Neuphoria Therapeutics Inc. 's 1. 38β — meaning NEUP is approximately -1330% more volatile than MCK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Neuphoria Therapeutics Inc. (NEUP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 135% for Perrigo Company plc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NEUP or INVA or ACAD or PRGO or MCK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is pulling ahead at 18. 5% versus -2. 8% for Perrigo Company plc (PRGO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to -723. 2% for Perrigo Company plc. Over a 3-year CAGR, NEUP leads at 290. 1% 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 — NEUP or INVA or ACAD or PRGO or MCK?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -33. 5% for Perrigo Company plc — 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 -7. 2% for NEUP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NEUP 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.
07Is NEUP or INVA or ACAD or PRGO or MCK more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) trades at 4.
8x forward P/E versus 55. 6x for ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. — 50. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PRGO: 253. 2% to $36. 20.
08Which pays a better dividend — NEUP or INVA or ACAD or PRGO or MCK?
In this comparison, PRGO (11.
2% yield), MCK (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. NEUP, INVA, ACAD do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is NEUP or INVA or ACAD or PRGO or MCK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
11), +328. 4% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MCK: +328. 4%, NEUP: -97. 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.
10What are the main differences between NEUP and INVA and ACAD and PRGO and MCK?
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: NEUP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; ACAD is a small-cap deep-value stock; PRGO is a small-cap income-oriented stock; MCK is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. PRGO pays a dividend while NEUP, INVA, ACAD, MCK 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.