Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
PGEN vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
PGEN vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $1.22B | $280M | $5.06B | $1.62B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6M | $7M | $4M | $68M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-247M | $-136M | $-569M | $-413M |
| Gross Margin | 23.0% | — | -41.7% | -25.6% |
| Operating Margin | -18.6% | -22.2% | -134.1% | -6.5% |
| Total Debt | $6M | $78M | $395M | $93M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $30M | $47M | $355M | $155M |
PGEN vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Precigen, Inc. (PGEN) | 100 | 191.4 | +91.4% |
| Fate Therapeutics, … (FATE) | 100 | 7.4 | -92.6% |
| CRISPR Therapeutics… (CRSP) | 100 | 84.9 | -15.1% |
| Intellia Therapeuti… (NTLA) | 100 | 80.5 | -19.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PGEN vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PGEN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 1.44
- Lower volatility, beta 1.44, Low D/E 14.3%, current ratio 4.76x
- Beta 1.44 vs NTLA's 2.37
- +207.4% vs CRSP's +53.1%
FATE lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
CRSP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and defensive.
- 272.0% 10Y total return vs PGEN's -84.6%
- Beta 1.93, current ratio 13.32x
- -24.5% ROA vs PGEN's -144.1%, ROIC -22.3% vs -152.8%
NTLA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 16.9%, EPS growth 27.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 9.1%
- 16.9% revenue growth vs CRSP's -90.0%
- -6.1% margin vs CRSP's -138.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.9% revenue growth vs CRSP's -90.0% | |
| Quality / Margins | -6.1% margin vs CRSP's -138.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.44 vs NTLA's 2.37 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +207.4% vs CRSP's +53.1% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -24.5% ROA vs PGEN's -144.1%, ROIC -22.3% vs -152.8% |
PGEN vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
PGEN vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NTLA leads in 1 of 6 categories
CRSP leads 1 • PGEN leads 1 • FATE leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTLA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTLA is the larger business by revenue, generating $68M annually — 16.5x CRSP's $4M. NTLA is the more profitable business, keeping -6.1% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRSP's -138.6%. On growth, PGEN holds the edge at +2.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $6M | $7M | $4M | $68M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$115M | -$148M | -$535M | -$431M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$247M | -$136M | -$569M | -$413M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$76M | -$88M | -$401M | -$396M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +23.0% | — | -41.7% | -25.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -18.6% | -22.2% | -134.1% | -6.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -39.1% | -20.5% | -138.6% | -6.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -12.0% | -13.2% | -97.8% | -5.8% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +2.1% | -26.4% | +68.6% | +78.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -11.7% | +38.6% | +19.0% | +34.6% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — PGEN and FATE and NTLA each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.2B | $280M | $5.1B | $1.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.2B | $312M | $5.1B | $1.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -8.83x | -2.11x | -8.10x | -3.60x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 309.66x | 42.18x | 1440.41x | 23.93x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 28.85x | 1.39x | 2.45x | 2.21x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CRSP leads this category, winning 4 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CRSP delivers a -30.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-31 in annual profit, vs $-6 for PGEN. NTLA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.14x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FATE's 0.38x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NTLA scores 4/9 vs CRSP's 1/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -5.9% | -65.8% | -30.9% | -56.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -144.1% | -42.7% | -24.5% | -45.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -152.8% | -36.5% | -22.3% | -44.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -107.2% | -43.1% | -26.6% | -48.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.14x | 0.38x | 0.21x | 0.14x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$24M | $31M | $40M | -$62M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $30M | $47M | $355M | $155M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $6M | $78M | $395M | $93M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -273.83x | — | — | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PGEN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in PGEN five years ago would be worth $6,346 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $318 for FATE. Over the past 12 months, PGEN leads with a +207.4% total return vs CRSP's +53.1%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PGEN at 49.2% vs NTLA's -31.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -3.0% | +145.5% | -2.5% | +48.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +207.4% | +143.0% | +53.1% | +88.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +232.0% | -55.4% | -6.3% | -68.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -36.5% | -96.8% | -51.3% | -79.8% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -84.6% | +40.5% | +272.0% | -42.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +49.2% | -23.6% | -2.2% | -31.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PGEN and FATE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PGEN is the less volatile stock with a 1.44 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NTLA's 2.37 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 NTLA's 48.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.43x | 1.99x | 1.87x | 2.21x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $5.23 | $2.46 | $78.48 | $28.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.23 | $0.91 | $33.50 | $6.83 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +79.3% | +98.6% | +66.8% | +48.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 62.7 | 81.0 | 55.5 | 50.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 4.3M | 1.9M | 2.0M | 5.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PGEN as "Buy", FATE as "Buy", CRSP as "Buy", NTLA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 1525.5% upside for FATE (target: $40) vs 20.2% for CRSP (target: $63).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $6.00 | $39.50 | $63.00 | $20.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 16 | 31 | 38 | 39 |
| 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% |
NTLA leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). CRSP leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
PGEN vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PGEN or FATE or CRSP or NTLA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Intellia Therapeutics, Inc.
(NTLA) is the stronger pick with 16. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -90. 0% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP). Analysts rate Precigen, Inc. (PGEN) a "Buy" — based on 16 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 — PGEN or FATE or CRSP or NTLA?
Over the past 5 years, Precigen, Inc.
(PGEN) delivered a total return of -36. 5%, compared to -96. 8% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CRSP returned +289. 1% versus PGEN's -84. 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 — PGEN or FATE or CRSP or NTLA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Precigen, Inc.
(PGEN) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 43β versus Intellia Therapeutics, Inc. 's 2. 21β — meaning NTLA is approximately 55% more volatile than PGEN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Intellia Therapeutics, Inc. (NTLA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 38% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — PGEN or FATE or CRSP or NTLA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Intellia Therapeutics, Inc.
(NTLA) is pulling ahead at 16. 9% versus -90. 0% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fate Therapeutics, Inc. grew EPS 29. 9% year-over-year, compared to -49. 1% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG. Over a 3-year CAGR, CRSP leads at 100. 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.
05Which has better profit margins — PGEN or FATE or CRSP or NTLA?
Intellia Therapeutics, Inc.
(NTLA) is the more profitable company, earning -609. 9% net margin versus -165. 7% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG — meaning it keeps -609. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: NTLA leads at -651. 7% versus -161. 9% for CRSP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NTLA leads at 76. 5%, 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 — PGEN or FATE or CRSP or NTLA?
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 PGEN or FATE or CRSP or NTLA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Precigen, Inc.
(PGEN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding. Intellia Therapeutics, Inc. (NTLA) carries a higher beta of 2. 21 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (PGEN: -84. 4%, NTLA: -41. 3%), 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 PGEN and FATE and CRSP and NTLA?
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: PGEN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FATE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CRSP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NTLA is a small-cap high-growth 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.