Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
PLRX vs AKBA vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
PLRX vs AKBA vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $70M | $248M | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $232M | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-113M | $-21M | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | — | 80.9% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | — | 2.3% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $29M | $216M | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $45M | $185M | $10.27B |
PLRX vs AKBA vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pliant Therapeutics… (PLRX) | 100 | 3.5 | -96.5% |
| Akebia Therapeutics… (AKBA) | 100 | 6.8 | -93.2% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PLRX vs AKBA vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PLRX is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 1.14
- Lower volatility, beta 1.14, Low D/E 16.1%, current ratio 12.00x
- Beta 1.14, current ratio 12.00x
AKBA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 47.5%, EPS growth 93.7%, 3Y rev CAGR -6.9%
- Better valuation composite
KO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 121.1% 10Y total return vs AKBA's -89.0%
- 27.8% margin vs AKBA's -8.8%
- 2.5% yield; 56-year raise streak; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 48.6% revenue growth vs KO's 1.9% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs AKBA's -8.8% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.14 vs AKBA's 1.32, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield; 56-year raise streak; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +17.2% vs AKBA's -74.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs PLRX's -45.1%, ROIC 15.8% vs -49.2% |
PLRX vs AKBA vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
PLRX vs AKBA vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO and PLRX operate at a comparable scale, with $49.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to AKBA's -8.8%. On growth, KO holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $232M | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$118M | $7M | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$113M | -$21M | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$99M | $60M | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +80.9% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +2.3% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -8.8% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +25.8% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -6.6% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +65.2% | -2.3% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
AKBA leads this category, winning 4 of 5 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, AKBA's 11.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than KO's 26.4x.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $70M | $248M | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $54M | $279M | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.47x | -44.45x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 11.28x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 1.05x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.38x | 7.29x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 3.65x | 67.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $-63 for AKBA. PLRX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.16x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AKBA's 6.63x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs PLRX's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -59.1% | -62.7% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -45.1% | -5.7% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -49.2% | +23.2% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -52.4% | +13.3% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.16x | 6.63x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$16M | $31M | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $45M | $185M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $29M | $216M | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -29.83x | 0.16x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
KO leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KO five years ago would be worth $16,560 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $343 for PLRX. Over the past 12 months, KO leads with a +17.2% total return vs AKBA's -74.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors KO at 13.7% vs PLRX's -63.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -9.6% | -40.4% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -23.1% | -74.7% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -95.0% | -26.6% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -96.6% | -74.7% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -94.7% | -89.0% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -63.2% | -9.8% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AKBA's 1.32 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs AKBA's 22.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.14x | 1.32x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $1.95 | $4.08 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.09 | $0.82 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +57.9% | +22.7% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.5 | 32.9 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 481K | 4.1M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AKBA as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 332.7% upside for AKBA (target: $4) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). KO is the only dividend payer here at 2.46% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $4.00 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 11 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). AKBA leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics).
PLRX vs AKBA vs KO: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PLRX or AKBA or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Akebia Therapeutics, Inc.
(AKBA) is the stronger pick with 47. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). The Coca-Cola Company (KO) offers the better valuation at 27. 2x trailing P/E (25. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Akebia Therapeutics, Inc. (AKBA) a "Buy" — based on 11 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 — PLRX or AKBA or KO?
Over the past 5 years, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) delivered a total return of +65.
6%, compared to -96. 6% for Pliant Therapeutics, Inc. (PLRX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: KO returned +121. 1% versus PLRX's -94. 7%. 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 — PLRX or AKBA or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Akebia Therapeutics, Inc. 's 1. 32β — meaning AKBA is approximately -759% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Pliant Therapeutics, Inc. (PLRX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 16% versus 7% for Akebia Therapeutics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — PLRX or AKBA or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Akebia Therapeutics, Inc.
(AKBA) is pulling ahead at 47. 5% versus 1. 9% for The Coca-Cola Company (KO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Akebia Therapeutics, Inc. grew EPS 93. 7% year-over-year, compared to 23. 6% for The Coca-Cola Company. Over a 3-year CAGR, KO leads at 3. 7% 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 — PLRX or AKBA or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -2. 3% for Akebia Therapeutics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% versus 0. 0% for PLRX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — AKBA leads at 83. 3%, 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.
06Is PLRX or AKBA or KO more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for AKBA: 332.
7% to $4. 00.
07Which pays a better dividend — PLRX or AKBA or KO?
In this comparison, KO (2.
5% yield) pays a dividend. PLRX, AKBA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is PLRX or AKBA or KO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, AKBA: -89. 0%), 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.
09What are the main differences between PLRX and AKBA and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (PLRX (Healthcare) and AKBA (Healthcare) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: PLRX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AKBA is a small-cap high-growth stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. KO pays a dividend while PLRX, AKBA do not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.