Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
PRPO vs DBVT vs ALKS vs CDNA vs NTRA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
PRPO vs DBVT vs ALKS vs CDNA vs NTRA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $53M | $1712.35T | $5.90B | $1.11B | $31.16B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $22M | $0.00 | $1.56B | $413M | $2.31B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-1M | $-168M | $153M | $-8M | $-208M |
| Gross Margin | 47.5% | — | 65.4% | 48.2% | 64.8% |
| Operating Margin | -9.7% | — | 12.3% | -3.3% | -13.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 24.8x | 22.8x | — |
| Total Debt | $1M | $22M | $70M | $20M | $214M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1M | $194M | $1.12B | $65M | $1.08B |
PRPO vs DBVT vs ALKS vs CDNA vs NTRA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Precipio, Inc. (PRPO) | 100 | 181.4 | +81.4% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 41.2 | -58.8% |
| Alkermes plc (ALKS) | 100 | 216.4 | +116.4% |
| CareDx, Inc (CDNA) | 100 | 66.7 | -33.3% |
| Natera, Inc. (NTRA) | 100 | 501.3 | +401.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PRPO vs DBVT vs ALKS vs CDNA vs NTRA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PRPO has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in stability and momentum.
- Beta 0.41 vs CDNA's 1.39
- +367.7% vs ALKS's +16.5%
DBVT is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 1.26
ALKS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night and defensive is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.06, Low D/E 3.8%, current ratio 3.55x
- Beta 1.06, current ratio 3.55x
- 9.8% margin vs NTRA's -9.0%
- 5.4% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0%
CDNA ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.
- Better valuation composite
NTRA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 35.9%, EPS growth 0.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 41.1%
- 20.9% 10Y total return vs ALKS's -11.0%
- 35.9% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 35.9% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 9.8% margin vs NTRA's -9.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.41 vs CDNA's 1.39 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +367.7% vs ALKS's +16.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.4% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0% |
PRPO vs DBVT vs ALKS vs CDNA vs NTRA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
PRPO vs DBVT vs ALKS vs CDNA vs NTRA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ALKS leads in 2 of 6 categories
NTRA leads 1 • PRPO leads 0 • DBVT leads 0 • CDNA leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ALKS leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTRA and DBVT operate at a comparable scale, with $2.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. ALKS is the more profitable business, keeping 9.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NTRA's -9.0%. On growth, NTRA holds the edge at +39.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $22M | $0 | $1.6B | $413M | $2.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$549,000 | -$112M | $212M | $2M | -$310M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$1M | -$168M | $153M | -$8M | -$208M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $589,000 | -$151M | $392M | $65M | $97M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +47.5% | — | +65.4% | +48.2% | +64.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -9.7% | — | +12.3% | -3.3% | -13.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -5.8% | — | +9.8% | -2.0% | -9.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +2.7% | — | +25.1% | +15.8% | +4.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +18.3% | — | +28.2% | +39.0% | +39.8% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +88.1% | +91.5% | -4.1% | +126.3% | +185.4% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — DBVT and ALKS and CDNA and NTRA each lead in 1 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $53M | $1712.35T | $5.9B | $1.1B | $31.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $53M | $1712.35T | $4.9B | $1.1B | $30.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -10.38x | -0.76x | 24.76x | -53.60x | -144.62x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 22.85x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 17.25x | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 3.32x | — | 4.00x | 2.92x | 13.51x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.68x | 0.66x | 3.28x | 3.77x | 17.55x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 245.72x | — | 12.28x | 30.66x | 285.53x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ALKS leads this category, winning 8 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ALKS delivers a 8.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $9 in annual profit, vs $-130 for DBVT. ALKS carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to DBVT's 0.13x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ALKS scores 7/9 vs DBVT's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -9.1% | -130.2% | +8.8% | -2.6% | -15.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -5.9% | -89.0% | +5.4% | -1.9% | -10.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -24.3% | — | +18.9% | -5.7% | -36.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -30.5% | -145.7% | +14.2% | -5.8% | -18.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.10x | 0.13x | 0.04x | 0.06x | 0.13x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$136,000 | -$172M | -$1.0B | -$46M | -$862M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1M | $194M | $1.1B | $65M | $1.1B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $1M | $22M | $70M | $20M | $214M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -13.58x | -189.82x | 32.30x | — | -25.21x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NTRA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in NTRA five years ago would be worth $21,587 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,759 for CDNA. Over the past 12 months, PRPO leads with a +367.7% total return vs ALKS's +16.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NTRA at 60.6% vs ALKS's 4.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +27.6% | +4.9% | +25.3% | +12.0% | -3.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +367.7% | +110.4% | +16.5% | +45.2% | +37.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +153.3% | +19.7% | +14.5% | +161.1% | +314.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -60.4% | -69.1% | +60.9% | -72.4% | +115.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.9% | -87.0% | -11.0% | +385.1% | +2089.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +36.3% | +6.2% | +4.6% | +37.7% | +60.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PRPO and ALKS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
PRPO is the less volatile stock with a 0.41 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CDNA's 1.39 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ALKS currently trades 96.7% from its 52-week high vs DBVT's 76.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.41x | 1.26x | 1.06x | 1.39x | 1.26x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $33.61 | $26.18 | $36.60 | $23.24 | $256.36 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.94 | $7.53 | $25.17 | $10.96 | $131.81 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.4% | +76.3% | +96.7% | +92.3% | +85.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.9 | 48.1 | 60.2 | 56.4 | 57.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 30K | 252K | 2.3M | 667K | 1.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: DBVT as "Buy", ALKS as "Buy", CDNA as "Buy", NTRA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 131.8% upside for DBVT (target: $46) vs 11.9% for CDNA (target: $24).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $46.33 | $44.00 | $24.00 | $262.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 15 | 28 | 13 | 27 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 0 | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.5% | +7.9% | 0.0% |
ALKS leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NTRA leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
PRPO vs DBVT vs ALKS vs CDNA vs NTRA: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PRPO or DBVT or ALKS or CDNA or NTRA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is the stronger pick with 35. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 2% for Alkermes plc (ALKS). Alkermes plc (ALKS) offers the better valuation at 24. 8x trailing P/E, making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT) a "Buy" — based on 15 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 — PRPO or DBVT or ALKS or CDNA or NTRA?
Over the past 5 years, Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) delivered a total return of +115. 9%, compared to -72. 4% for CareDx, Inc (CDNA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: NTRA returned +20. 9% versus PRPO's -98. 9%. 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 — PRPO or DBVT or ALKS or CDNA or NTRA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Precipio, Inc.
(PRPO) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 41β versus CareDx, Inc's 1. 39β — meaning CDNA is approximately 239% more volatile than PRPO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Alkermes plc (ALKS) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 13% for DBV Technologies S. A. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — PRPO or DBVT or ALKS or CDNA or NTRA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Natera, Inc.
(NTRA) is pulling ahead at 35. 9% versus -5. 2% for Alkermes plc (ALKS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Precipio, Inc. grew EPS 35. 0% year-over-year, compared to -347. 5% for DBV Technologies S. A.. Over a 3-year CAGR, NTRA leads at 41. 1% 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 — PRPO or DBVT or ALKS or CDNA or NTRA?
Alkermes plc (ALKS) is the more profitable company, earning 16.
4% net margin versus -26. 9% for Precipio, Inc. — meaning it keeps 16. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ALKS leads at 17. 2% versus -26. 4% for PRPO. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ALKS leads at 86. 7%, 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 PRPO or DBVT or ALKS or CDNA or NTRA more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for DBVT: 131.
8% to $46. 33.
07Which pays a better dividend — PRPO or DBVT or ALKS or CDNA or NTRA?
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.
08Is PRPO or DBVT or ALKS or CDNA or NTRA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Precipio, Inc.
(PRPO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 41)). Both have compounded well over 10 years (PRPO: -98. 9%, DBVT: -87. 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 PRPO and DBVT and ALKS and CDNA and NTRA?
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: PRPO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; DBVT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; ALKS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CDNA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NTRA is a mid-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.