Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
NOTV vs CRL vs HALO vs MEDP vs ICLR
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Biotechnology
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
NOTV vs CRL vs HALO vs MEDP vs ICLR — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $10M | $8.98B | $7.68B | $12.24B | $9.54B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $513M | $4.03B | $1.40B | $2.68B | $8.10B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-69M | $-185M | $317M | $460M | $599M |
| Gross Margin | 20.9% | 24.9% | 81.9% | 29.1% | 26.9% |
| Operating Margin | -6.0% | 11.8% | 58.4% | 21.0% | 12.2% |
| Forward P/E | — | 16.4x | 8.1x | 25.2x | 10.5x |
| Total Debt | $409M | $3.07B | $0.00 | $250M | $3.60B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $22M | $214M | $134M | $497M | $539M |
NOTV vs CRL vs HALO vs MEDP vs ICLR — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inotiv, Inc. (NOTV) | 100 | 5.5 | -94.5% |
| Charles River Labor… (CRL) | 100 | 101.3 | +1.3% |
| Halozyme Therapeuti… (HALO) | 100 | 268.6 | +168.6% |
| Medpace Holdings, I… (MEDP) | 100 | 461.9 | +361.9% |
| ICON Public Limited… (ICLR) | 100 | 74.2 | -25.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: NOTV vs CRL vs HALO vs MEDP vs ICLR
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
NOTV plays a supporting role in this comparison — it may shine differently against other peers.
CRL is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 1.52
HALO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 37.6%, EPS growth -25.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 28.4%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.56, current ratio 4.66x
- PEG 0.35 vs ICLR's 1.50
- Beta 0.56, current ratio 4.66x
MEDP is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 14.4% 10Y total return vs HALO's 5.7%
- +42.9% vs NOTV's -85.4%
- 24.8% ROA vs NOTV's -8.9%, ROIC 154.9% vs -4.1%
Among these 5 stocks, ICLR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 37.6% revenue growth vs CRL's -0.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.1x vs 25.2x), PEG 0.35 vs 0.79 | |
| Quality / Margins | 22.7% margin vs NOTV's -13.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.56 vs NOTV's 3.47 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +42.9% vs NOTV's -85.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 24.8% ROA vs NOTV's -8.9%, ROIC 154.9% vs -4.1% |
NOTV vs CRL vs HALO vs MEDP vs ICLR — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
NOTV vs CRL vs HALO vs MEDP vs ICLR — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HALO leads in 1 of 6 categories
MEDP leads 1 • CRL leads 1 • NOTV leads 0 • ICLR leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
HALO leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ICLR is the larger business by revenue, generating $8.1B annually — 15.8x NOTV's $513M. HALO is the more profitable business, keeping 22.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NOTV's -13.4%. On growth, HALO holds the edge at +51.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $513M | $4.0B | $1.4B | $2.7B | $8.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $25M | $757M | $945M | $577M | $1.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$69M | -$185M | $317M | $460M | $599M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$27M | $391M | $645M | $745M | $996M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +20.9% | +24.9% | +81.9% | +29.1% | +26.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.0% | +11.8% | +58.4% | +21.0% | +12.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -13.4% | -4.6% | +22.7% | +17.2% | +7.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.3% | +9.7% | +46.2% | +27.8% | +12.3% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +5.9% | +1.2% | +51.6% | +26.5% | +0.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +65.8% | -160.0% | -2.1% | +16.6% | -98.7% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — NOTV and ICLR each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 13.1x trailing earnings, ICLR trades at a 53% valuation discount to MEDP's 28.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), MEDP offers better value at 0.88x vs ICLR's 1.87x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $10M | $9.0B | $7.7B | $12.2B | $9.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $397M | $11.8B | $7.5B | $12.0B | $12.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.14x | -62.52x | 25.46x | 28.06x | 13.12x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 16.42x | 8.09x | 25.24x | 10.53x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 1.11x | 0.88x | 1.87x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 15.88x | 12.98x | 8.34x | 21.31x | 7.95x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.02x | 2.24x | 5.50x | 4.84x | 1.15x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.07x | 2.81x | 165.47x | 27.57x | 1.09x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 17.31x | 11.91x | 17.96x | 8.53x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MEDP leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
HALO delivers a 6.5% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $6 in annual profit, vs $-50 for NOTV. ICLR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.38x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NOTV's 3.01x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ICLR scores 7/9 vs CRL's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -50.4% | -5.7% | +6.5% | +120.9% | +6.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -8.9% | -2.5% | +12.5% | +24.8% | +3.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -4.1% | +6.3% | +73.4% | +154.9% | +6.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -7.0% | +8.1% | +38.2% | +65.7% | +7.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.01x | 0.95x | — | 0.55x | 0.38x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $387M | $2.9B | -$134M | -$247M | $3.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $22M | $214M | $134M | $497M | $539M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $409M | $3.1B | $0 | $250M | $3.6B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -0.54x | 6.38x | 46.08x | — | 3.96x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — HALO and MEDP each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MEDP five years ago would be worth $25,938 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $105 for NOTV. Over the past 12 months, MEDP leads with a +42.9% total return vs NOTV's -85.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HALO at 29.1% vs NOTV's -64.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -45.5% | -10.1% | -7.3% | -24.9% | -33.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -85.4% | +32.8% | -7.1% | +42.9% | -10.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -95.3% | -4.2% | +115.3% | +104.6% | -34.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.9% | -46.9% | +37.0% | +159.4% | -45.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -70.6% | +119.2% | +570.7% | +1442.7% | +91.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -64.0% | -1.4% | +29.1% | +27.0% | -13.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CRL and HALO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
HALO is the less volatile stock with a 0.56 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NOTV's 3.47 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CRL currently trades 79.5% from its 52-week high vs NOTV's 8.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 3.47x | 1.52x | 0.56x | 1.26x | 1.60x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.32 | $228.88 | $82.22 | $628.92 | $211.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.22 | $131.30 | $47.50 | $284.48 | $66.57 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +8.9% | +79.5% | +79.3% | +68.2% | +59.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.5 | 57.2 | 52.4 | 40.6 | 62.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 687K | 806K | 1.4M | 371K | 1.1M |
Analyst Outlook
CRL leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CRL as "Buy", HALO as "Buy", MEDP as "Hold", ICLR as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 20.2% upside for HALO (target: $78) vs 12.9% for CRL (target: $205).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $205.43 | $78.33 | $498.86 | $149.63 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 36 | 27 | 19 | 30 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 1 | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +4.0% | +4.5% | +7.5% | +5.2% |
HALO leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). MEDP leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
NOTV vs CRL vs HALO vs MEDP vs ICLR: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is NOTV or CRL or HALO or MEDP or ICLR a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the stronger pick with 37. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -0. 9% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL). ICON Public Limited Company (ICLR) offers the better valuation at 13. 1x trailing P/E (10. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL) a "Buy" — based on 36 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 — NOTV or CRL or HALO or MEDP or ICLR?
On trailing P/E, ICON Public Limited Company (ICLR) is the cheapest at 13.
1x versus Medpace Holdings, Inc. at 28. 1x. On forward P/E, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 1x — 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: Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. wins at 0. 35x versus ICON Public Limited Company's 1. 50x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — NOTV or CRL or HALO or MEDP or ICLR?
Over the past 5 years, Medpace Holdings, Inc.
(MEDP) delivered a total return of +159. 4%, compared to -98. 9% for Inotiv, Inc. (NOTV). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MEDP returned +1443% versus NOTV's -70. 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 — NOTV or CRL or HALO or MEDP or ICLR?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 56β versus Inotiv, Inc. 's 3. 47β — meaning NOTV is approximately 522% more volatile than HALO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, ICON Public Limited Company (ICLR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 38% versus 3% for Inotiv, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — NOTV or CRL or HALO or MEDP or ICLR?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is pulling ahead at 37. 6% versus -0. 9% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Inotiv, Inc. grew EPS 49. 6% year-over-year, compared to -1555. 0% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, HALO leads at 28. 4% 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 — NOTV or CRL or HALO or MEDP or ICLR?
Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the more profitable company, earning 22. 7% net margin versus -13. 4% for Inotiv, Inc. — meaning it keeps 22. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HALO leads at 58. 4% versus -6. 0% for NOTV. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HALO leads at 78. 1%, 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 NOTV or CRL or HALO or MEDP or ICLR 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, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus ICON Public Limited Company's 1. 50x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. (HALO) trades at 8. 1x forward P/E versus 25. 2x for Medpace Holdings, Inc. — 17. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for HALO: 20. 2% to $78. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — NOTV or CRL or HALO or MEDP or ICLR?
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.
09Is NOTV or CRL or HALO or MEDP or ICLR better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 56), +570. 7% 10Y return). Inotiv, Inc. (NOTV) carries a higher beta of 3. 47 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (HALO: +570. 7%, NOTV: -70. 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 NOTV and CRL and HALO and MEDP and ICLR?
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: NOTV is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CRL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HALO is a small-cap high-growth stock; MEDP is a mid-cap high-growth stock; ICLR is a small-cap deep-value 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.