Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
NKTX vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
NKTX vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $223M | $1.27B | $280M | $5.66B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $286M | $7M | $0.00 |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-103M | $-354M | $-136M | $-163M |
| Gross Margin | — | 114.5% | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | -127.2% | -22.2% | — |
| Total Debt | $80M | $48M | $78M | $98M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $28M | $163M | $47M | $23M |
NKTX vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nkarta, Inc. (NKTX) | 100 | 12.2 | -87.8% |
| Iovance Biotherapeu… (IOVA) | 100 | 12.2 | -87.8% |
| Fate Therapeutics, … (FATE) | 100 | 7.8 | -92.2% |
| Celcuity Inc. (CELC) | 100 | 2466.2 | +2366.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NKTX vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NKTX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for quality and efficiency.
- 3.9% margin vs FATE's -20.5%
- -24.0% ROA vs CELC's -58.0%, ROIC -24.3% vs -50.3%
IOVA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 60.6%, EPS growth 14.8%
- 60.6% revenue growth vs CELC's -73.2%
FATE lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
CELC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- beta 1.71
- 8.1% 10Y total return vs IOVA's -34.3%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.71, Low D/E 84.7%, current ratio 7.71x
- Beta 1.71, current ratio 7.71x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 60.6% revenue growth vs CELC's -73.2% | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.9% margin vs FATE's -20.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.71 vs FATE's 2.17 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +11.8% vs IOVA's +13.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -24.0% ROA vs CELC's -58.0%, ROIC -24.3% vs -50.3% |
NKTX vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
NKTX vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
IOVA leads in 1 of 6 categories
CELC leads 1 • NKTX leads 0 • FATE leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IOVA leads this category, winning 5 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IOVA and CELC operate at a comparable scale, with $286M and $0 in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from -123.9% (IOVA) to -20.5% (FATE). On growth, IOVA holds the edge at +44.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $286M | $7M | $0 |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$113M | -$330M | -$148M | -$159M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$103M | -$354M | -$136M | -$163M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$94M | -$305M | -$88M | -$145M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +114.5% | — | — |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -127.2% | -22.2% | — |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -123.9% | -20.5% | — |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -106.8% | -13.2% | — |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +44.8% | -26.4% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +25.6% | +47.2% | +38.6% | -31.4% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — NKTX and IOVA and CELC each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $223M | $1.3B | $280M | $5.7B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $275M | $1.2B | $312M | $5.7B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.97x | -3.26x | -2.11x | -46.19x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 4.82x | 42.18x | — |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.52x | 1.82x | 1.39x | 44.60x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — NKTX and IOVA each lead in 4 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
NKTX delivers a -30.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-30 in annual profit, vs $-179 for CELC. IOVA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.07x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CELC's 0.85x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), IOVA scores 5/9 vs CELC's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -30.4% | -50.2% | -65.8% | -179.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -24.0% | -38.8% | -42.7% | -58.0% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -24.3% | -48.9% | -36.5% | -50.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -30.6% | -51.6% | -43.1% | -58.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 1 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.20x | 0.07x | 0.38x | 0.85x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $52M | -$115M | $31M | $75M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $28M | $163M | $47M | $23M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $80M | $48M | $78M | $98M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | — | -5.02x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CELC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CELC five years ago would be worth $48,161 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $318 for FATE. Over the past 12 months, CELC leads with a +1184.0% total return vs IOVA's +13.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CELC at 140.6% vs FATE's -23.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +68.4% | +40.9% | +145.5% | +30.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +68.4% | +13.4% | +143.0% | +1184.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -31.5% | -49.9% | -55.4% | +1292.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -88.6% | -87.6% | -96.8% | +381.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.4% | -34.3% | +40.5% | +814.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -11.9% | -20.6% | -23.6% | +140.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FATE and CELC each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
CELC is the less volatile stock with a 1.71 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than FATE's 2.17 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FATE currently trades 98.6% from its 52-week high vs IOVA's 63.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.07x | 2.01x | 2.17x | 1.71x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.65 | $5.63 | $2.46 | $151.02 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.63 | $1.64 | $0.91 | $9.51 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +86.3% | +63.1% | +98.6% | +86.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.9 | 63.1 | 81.0 | 63.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 802K | 16.2M | 1.9M | 800K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NKTX as "Buy", IOVA as "Buy", FATE as "Buy", CELC as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 1525.5% upside for FATE (target: $40) vs -43.7% for IOVA (target: $2).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $21.60 | $2.00 | $39.50 | $124.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 20 | 31 | 9 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 1 | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
IOVA leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). CELC leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
NKTX vs IOVA vs FATE vs CELC: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NKTX or IOVA or FATE or CELC a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(IOVA) is the stronger pick with 60. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -51. 2% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Analysts rate Nkarta, Inc. (NKTX) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — NKTX or IOVA or FATE or CELC?
Over the past 5 years, Celcuity Inc.
(CELC) delivered a total return of +381. 6%, compared to -96. 8% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CELC returned +814. 7% versus NKTX's -93. 4%. 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 — NKTX or IOVA or FATE or CELC?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Celcuity Inc.
(CELC) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 71β versus Fate Therapeutics, Inc. 's 2. 17β — meaning FATE is approximately 27% more volatile than CELC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc. (IOVA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 85% for Celcuity Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — NKTX or IOVA or FATE or CELC?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(IOVA) is pulling ahead at 60. 6% versus -51. 2% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Nkarta, Inc. grew EPS 33. 3% year-over-year, compared to -5. 2% for Celcuity Inc.. 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 — NKTX or IOVA or FATE or CELC?
Nkarta, Inc.
(NKTX) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -20. 5% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NKTX leads at 0. 0% versus -22. 2% for FATE. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — IOVA leads at 97. 2%, 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — NKTX or IOVA or FATE or CELC?
None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.
All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.
07Is NKTX or IOVA or FATE or CELC better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Celcuity Inc.
(CELC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+814. 7% 10Y return). Nkarta, Inc. (NKTX) carries a higher beta of 2. 07 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CELC: +814. 7%, NKTX: -93. 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.
08What are the main differences between NKTX and IOVA and FATE and CELC?
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: NKTX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IOVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; FATE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CELC is a small-cap quality compounder stock. 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.