Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
OABI vs IMVT vs HALO vs RCUS vs REGN
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
OABI vs IMVT vs HALO vs RCUS vs REGN — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $189M | $5.88B | $7.55B | $2.55B | $74.28B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $29M | $0.00 | $1.40B | $236M | $14.92B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-54M | $-464M | $317M | $-369M | $4.42B |
| Gross Margin | 35.5% | — | 81.9% | 90.7% | 84.5% |
| Operating Margin | -200.3% | — | 58.4% | -168.6% | 24.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 8.0x | — | 15.5x |
| Total Debt | $20M | $98K | $0.00 | $99M | $2.71B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $26M | $714M | $134M | $222M | $3.12B |
OABI vs IMVT vs HALO vs RCUS vs REGN — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| OmniAb, Inc. (OABI) | 100 | 17.0 | -83.0% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 333.0 | +233.0% |
| Halozyme Therapeuti… (HALO) | 100 | 157.6 | +57.6% |
| Arcus Biosciences, … (RCUS) | 100 | 72.7 | -27.3% |
| Regeneron Pharmaceu… (REGN) | 100 | 118.1 | +18.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: OABI vs IMVT vs HALO vs RCUS vs REGN
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
OABI lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 190.9% 10Y total return vs HALO's 5.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.36, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 11.16x
HALO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and valuation efficiency.
- beta 0.51
- PEG 0.35 vs REGN's 2.44
- Beta 0.51, current ratio 4.66x
- 37.6% revenue growth vs OABI's -29.3%
RCUS ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +197.3% vs HALO's -5.3%
REGN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 1.0%, EPS growth 8.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.6%
- 29.6% margin vs OABI's -187.7%
- 0.5% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 37.6% revenue growth vs OABI's -29.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.0x vs 15.5x), PEG 0.35 vs 2.44 | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.6% margin vs OABI's -187.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.51 vs RCUS's 1.84 | |
| Dividends | 0.5% yield; 1-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +197.3% vs HALO's -5.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.5% ROA vs IMVT's -44.1% |
OABI vs IMVT vs HALO vs RCUS vs REGN — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
OABI vs IMVT vs HALO vs RCUS vs REGN — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
HALO leads in 3 of 6 categories
OABI leads 0 • IMVT leads 0 • RCUS leads 0 • REGN leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — OABI and HALO each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
REGN and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $14.9B and $0 in trailing revenue. REGN is the more profitable business, keeping 29.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to OABI's -187.7%. On growth, OABI holds the edge at +2.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $29M | $0 | $1.4B | $236M | $14.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$35M | -$487M | $945M | -$391M | $4.2B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$54M | -$464M | $317M | -$369M | $4.4B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$26M | -$423M | $645M | -$489M | $4.2B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +35.5% | — | +81.9% | +90.7% | +84.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -2.0% | — | +58.4% | -168.6% | +24.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -187.7% | — | +22.7% | -156.4% | +29.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -90.0% | — | +46.2% | -2.1% | +27.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.5% | — | +51.6% | -39.3% | +19.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +64.7% | +19.7% | -2.1% | +10.5% | -7.2% |
Valuation Metrics
HALO leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 17.2x trailing earnings, REGN trades at a 31% valuation discount to HALO's 25.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), HALO offers better value at 1.09x vs REGN's 2.72x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $189M | $5.9B | $7.6B | $2.6B | $74.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $184M | $5.2B | $7.4B | $2.4B | $73.9B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.91x | -10.60x | 25.05x | -7.71x | 17.23x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 7.96x | — | 15.46x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 1.09x | — | 2.72x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 8.20x | — | 17.92x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 10.12x | — | 5.41x | 10.34x | 5.18x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.71x | 6.20x | 162.76x | 4.32x | 2.48x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 11.72x | — | 18.20x |
Profitability & Efficiency
HALO leads this category, winning 6 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 $-69 for RCUS. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to RCUS's 0.16x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), HALO scores 5/9 vs RCUS's 0/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -20.3% | -47.1% | +6.5% | -69.0% | +14.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -18.1% | -44.1% | +12.5% | -35.3% | +11.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -19.7% | — | +73.4% | -64.1% | +8.9% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -24.0% | -66.1% | +38.2% | -42.1% | +10.2% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.08x | 0.00x | — | 0.16x | 0.09x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$5M | -$714M | -$134M | -$123M | -$412M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $26M | $714M | $134M | $222M | $3.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $20M | $98,000 | $0 | $99M | $2.7B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | 46.08x | -13.38x | 108.44x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
HALO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IMVT five years ago would be worth $18,445 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1,701 for OABI. Over the past 12 months, RCUS leads with a +197.3% total return vs HALO's -5.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors HALO at 28.4% vs OABI's -21.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -11.7% | +11.7% | -8.8% | +8.9% | -7.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +5.7% | +102.4% | -5.3% | +197.3% | +31.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -51.9% | +49.8% | +111.8% | +27.8% | -4.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -83.0% | +84.4% | +39.1% | -12.1% | +43.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -83.0% | +190.9% | +559.7% | +49.2% | +91.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -21.6% | +14.4% | +28.4% | +8.5% | -1.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — IMVT and HALO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
HALO is the less volatile stock with a 0.51 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RCUS's 1.84 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IMVT currently trades 96.2% from its 52-week high vs OABI's 72.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.52x | 1.36x | 0.51x | 1.84x | 0.77x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.30 | $30.09 | $82.22 | $28.72 | $821.11 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.22 | $13.36 | $47.50 | $7.72 | $476.49 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +72.2% | +96.2% | +78.0% | +88.3% | +87.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.0 | 50.6 | 47.7 | 52.9 | 41.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 458K | 1.4M | 1.4M | 1.2M | 626K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: OABI as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", HALO as "Buy", RCUS as "Buy", REGN as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 141.0% upside for OABI (target: $4) vs 17.9% for HALO (target: $76). REGN is the only dividend payer here at 0.48% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $4.00 | $45.50 | $75.60 | $30.00 | $865.68 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 9 | 23 | 27 | 18 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +0.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $3.41 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.5% | 0.0% | +5.3% |
HALO leads in 3 of 6 categories — strongest in Valuation Metrics and Profitability & Efficiency. 2 categories are tied.
OABI vs IMVT vs HALO vs RCUS vs REGN: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is OABI or IMVT or HALO or RCUS or REGN 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 -29. 3% for OmniAb, Inc. (OABI). Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (REGN) offers the better valuation at 17. 2x trailing P/E (15. 5x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate OmniAb, Inc. (OABI) a "Buy" — based on 9 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 — OABI or IMVT or HALO or RCUS or REGN?
On trailing P/E, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(REGN) is the cheapest at 17. 2x versus Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. at 25. 0x. On forward P/E, Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 0x — 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 Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 2. 44x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — OABI or IMVT or HALO or RCUS or REGN?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +84. 4%, compared to -83. 0% for OmniAb, Inc. (OABI). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: HALO returned +559. 7% versus OABI's -83. 0%. 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 — OABI or IMVT or HALO or RCUS or REGN?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 51β versus Arcus Biosciences, Inc. 's 1. 84β — meaning RCUS is approximately 259% more volatile than HALO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 16% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — OABI or IMVT or HALO or RCUS or REGN?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc.
(HALO) is pulling ahead at 37. 6% versus -29. 3% for OmniAb, Inc. (OABI). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. grew EPS 8. 2% year-over-year, compared to -45. 2% for Immunovant, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, RCUS leads at 30. 2% 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 — OABI or IMVT or HALO or RCUS or REGN?
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(REGN) is the more profitable company, earning 31. 4% net margin versus -347. 0% for OmniAb, Inc. — meaning it keeps 31. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HALO leads at 58. 4% versus -383. 1% for OABI. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RCUS leads at 96. 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 OABI or IMVT or HALO or RCUS or REGN 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 Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 2. 44x. 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. 0x forward P/E versus 15. 5x for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. — 7. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for OABI: 141. 0% to $4. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — OABI or IMVT or HALO or RCUS or REGN?
In this comparison, REGN (0.
5% yield) pays a dividend. OABI, IMVT, HALO, RCUS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is OABI or IMVT or HALO or RCUS or REGN 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. 51), +559. 7% 10Y return). Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) carries a higher beta of 1. 84 — 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: +559. 7%, RCUS: +49. 2%), 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 OABI and IMVT and HALO and RCUS and REGN?
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: OABI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; HALO is a small-cap high-growth stock; RCUS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; REGN is a mid-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.