Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
NKTX vs TCRX vs IMVT vs FATE
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
NKTX vs TCRX vs IMVT vs FATE — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $223M | $157M | $5.53B | $280M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $8M | $0.00 | $7M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-103M | $-124M | $-464M | $-136M |
| Gross Margin | — | 81.7% | — | — |
| Operating Margin | — | -15.8% | — | -22.2% |
| Total Debt | $80M | $94M | $98K | $78M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $28M | $152M | $714M | $47M |
NKTX vs TCRX vs IMVT vs FATE — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nkarta, Inc. (NKTX) | 100 | 9.9 | -90.1% |
| TScan Therapeutics,… (TCRX) | 100 | 12.5 | -87.5% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 260.2 | +160.2% |
| Fate Therapeutics, … (FATE) | 100 | 2.9 | -97.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NKTX vs TCRX vs IMVT vs FATE
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 TCRX's -50.1%, ROIC -24.3% vs -90.7%
TCRX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 266.7%, EPS growth 12.3%, 3Y rev CAGR -8.6%
- 266.7% revenue growth vs FATE's -51.2%
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- beta 1.37
- 173.6% 10Y total return vs TCRX's -88.5%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.37, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 11.16x
- Beta 1.37, current ratio 11.16x
FATE is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +143.0% vs TCRX's -11.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 266.7% revenue growth vs FATE's -51.2% | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.9% margin vs FATE's -20.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.37 vs TCRX's 2.35, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +143.0% vs TCRX's -11.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -24.0% ROA vs TCRX's -50.1%, ROIC -24.3% vs -90.7% |
NKTX vs TCRX vs IMVT vs FATE — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
NKTX vs TCRX vs IMVT vs FATE — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
FATE leads in 1 of 6 categories
NKTX leads 1 • IMVT leads 1 • TCRX leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
FATE leads this category, winning 3 of 5 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
TCRX and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $8M and $0 in trailing revenue. TCRX is the more profitable business, keeping -15.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to FATE's -20.5%. On growth, FATE holds the edge at -26.4% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $8M | $0 | $7M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$113M | -$127M | -$487M | -$148M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$103M | -$124M | -$464M | -$136M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$94M | -$125M | -$423M | -$88M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +81.7% | — | — |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -15.8% | — | -22.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -15.2% | — | -20.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -15.3% | — | -13.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -100.0% | — | -26.4% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +25.6% | +15.4% | +19.7% | +38.6% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — NKTX and TCRX and IMVT each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $223M | $157M | $5.5B | $280M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $275M | $99M | $4.8B | $312M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.97x | -1.21x | -9.97x | -2.11x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 15.22x | — | 42.18x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.52x | 1.28x | 5.83x | 1.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
NKTX leads this category, winning 5 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 $-92 for TCRX. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TCRX's 0.76x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NKTX scores 4/9 vs FATE's 2/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -30.4% | -91.9% | -47.1% | -65.8% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -24.0% | -50.1% | -44.1% | -42.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -24.3% | -90.7% | — | -36.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -30.6% | -49.8% | -66.1% | -43.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.20x | 0.76x | 0.00x | 0.38x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $52M | -$58M | -$714M | $31M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $28M | $152M | $714M | $47M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $80M | $94M | $98,000 | $78M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -73.07x | — | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
IMVT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IMVT five years ago would be worth $16,241 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $318 for FATE. Over the past 12 months, FATE leads with a +143.0% total return vs TCRX's -11.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IMVT at 12.1% vs FATE's -23.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +68.4% | +18.6% | +5.1% | +145.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +68.4% | -11.0% | +96.1% | +143.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -31.5% | -46.2% | +40.9% | -55.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -88.6% | -88.5% | +62.4% | -96.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.4% | -88.5% | +173.6% | +40.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -11.9% | -18.7% | +12.1% | -23.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — IMVT and FATE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
IMVT is the less volatile stock with a 1.37 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TCRX's 2.35 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 TCRX's 47.1% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.07x | 2.35x | 1.37x | 2.17x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.65 | $2.57 | $30.09 | $2.46 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.63 | $0.88 | $13.36 | $0.91 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +86.3% | +47.1% | +90.5% | +98.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.9 | 56.8 | 60.2 | 81.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 802K | 910K | 1.4M | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NKTX as "Buy", TCRX as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", FATE as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 1525.5% upside for FATE (target: $40) vs 67.2% for IMVT (target: $46).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $21.60 | $7.50 | $45.50 | $39.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 8 | 23 | 31 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
FATE leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). NKTX leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
NKTX vs TCRX vs IMVT vs FATE: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NKTX or TCRX or IMVT or FATE a better buy right now?
For growth investors, TScan Therapeutics, Inc.
(TCRX) is the stronger pick with 266. 7% 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 TCRX or IMVT or FATE?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +62. 4%, compared to -96. 8% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +173. 6% 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 TCRX or IMVT or FATE?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 37β versus TScan Therapeutics, Inc. 's 2. 35β — meaning TCRX is approximately 71% more volatile than IMVT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 76% for TScan Therapeutics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — NKTX or TCRX or IMVT or FATE?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), TScan Therapeutics, Inc.
(TCRX) is pulling ahead at 266. 7% 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 -45. 2% for Immunovant, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, TCRX leads at -8. 6% 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 — NKTX or TCRX or IMVT or FATE?
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 — TCRX leads at 72. 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 TCRX or IMVT or FATE?
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 TCRX or IMVT or FATE better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+173. 6% 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 (IMVT: +173. 6%, 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 TCRX and IMVT and FATE?
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; TCRX is a small-cap high-growth stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FATE 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.