Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
PULM vs INSM vs PRAX vs ARWR vs BEAM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
PULM vs INSM vs PRAX vs ARWR vs BEAM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $5M | $22.62B | $9.63B | $10.92B | $3.23B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $606M | $-92K | $622M | $132M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-5M | $-1.28B | $-327M | $-301M | $-65M |
| Gross Margin | — | 79.4% | — | 85.1% | -64.2% |
| Operating Margin | — | -194.0% | — | -35.7% | -281.0% |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $768M | $110K | $366M | $294M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $4M | $510M | $357M | $227M | $295M |
PULM vs INSM vs PRAX vs ARWR vs BEAM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pulmatrix, Inc. (PULM) | 100 | 5.8 | -94.2% |
| Insmed Incorporated (INSM) | 100 | 318.2 | +218.2% |
| Praxis Precision Me… (PRAX) | 100 | 63.5 | -36.5% |
| Arrowhead Pharmaceu… (ARWR) | 100 | 136.0 | +36.0% |
| Beam Therapeutics I… (BEAM) | 100 | 92.1 | -7.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: PULM vs INSM vs PRAX vs ARWR vs BEAM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
PULM is the clearest fit if your priority is defensive.
- Beta 0.68, current ratio 12.55x
INSM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- beta 0.54
- Beta 0.54 vs BEAM's 2.14
PRAX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.55, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 10.22x
- 2.4% margin vs INSM's -210.5%
- +7.7% vs PULM's -79.3%
ARWR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 232.6%, EPS growth 99.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 50.5%
- 12.5% 10Y total return vs INSM's 7.9%
- 232.6% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0%
BEAM is the clearest fit if your priority is efficiency.
- -4.6% ROA vs PULM's -124.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 232.6% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0% | |
| Quality / Margins | 2.4% margin vs INSM's -210.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.54 vs BEAM's 2.14 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +7.7% vs PULM's -79.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -4.6% ROA vs PULM's -124.7% |
PULM vs INSM vs PRAX vs ARWR vs BEAM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
PULM vs INSM vs PRAX vs ARWR vs BEAM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ARWR leads in 2 of 6 categories
PRAX leads 1 • PULM leads 0 • INSM leads 0 • BEAM leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ARWR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ARWR and PRAX operate at a comparable scale, with $622M and -$92,000 in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from -48.4% (ARWR) to -2.1% (INSM). On growth, INSM holds the edge at +152.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $606M | -$92,000 | $622M | $132M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$5M | -$1.2B | -$357M | -$203M | -$355M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$5M | -$1.3B | -$327M | -$301M | -$65M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$5M | -$998M | -$283M | -$51M | -$384M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +79.4% | — | +85.1% | -64.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -194.0% | — | -35.7% | -2.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -2.1% | — | -48.4% | -49.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -164.5% | — | -8.2% | -2.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | +152.6% | — | -86.4% | -100.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +53.7% | -16.7% | +2.7% | -133.8% | +26.6% |
Valuation Metrics
ARWR leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $5M | $22.6B | $9.6B | $10.9B | $3.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $659,971 | $22.9B | $9.3B | $11.1B | $3.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.92x | -16.35x | -24.72x | -6389.34x | -38.85x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 90.41x | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 37.30x | — | 13.16x | 23.14x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.25x | 30.30x | 8.54x | 20.71x | 2.51x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 69.58x | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — ARWR and BEAM each lead in 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
BEAM delivers a -5.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-6 in annual profit, vs $-168 for INSM. PRAX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to INSM's 1.04x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ARWR scores 6/9 vs PULM's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -135.5% | -168.4% | -43.0% | -55.5% | -5.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -124.7% | -57.3% | -40.2% | -18.1% | -4.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -86.5% | -65.0% | +9.3% | -31.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -80.6% | -66.8% | -49.3% | +8.8% | -33.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 1.04x | 0.00x | 0.73x | 0.24x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$4M | $258M | -$357M | $140M | -$1M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $4M | $510M | $357M | $227M | $295M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $768M | $110,000 | $366M | $294M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -14.23x | — | -1.03x | 1.08x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PRAX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in INSM five years ago would be worth $32,168 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $727 for PULM. Over the past 12 months, PRAX leads with a +775.0% total return vs PULM's -79.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PRAX at 174.9% vs PULM's -24.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -42.5% | -40.8% | +16.4% | +15.0% | +16.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -79.3% | +53.5% | +775.0% | +496.9% | +93.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -56.7% | +454.5% | +1976.5% | +92.7% | -5.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -92.7% | +221.7% | -20.8% | +17.4% | -55.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.7% | +793.5% | -20.1% | +1253.3% | +67.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -24.3% | +77.0% | +174.9% | +24.4% | -1.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — INSM and ARWR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INSM is the less volatile stock with a 0.54 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than BEAM's 2.14 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ARWR currently trades 98.1% from its 52-week high vs PULM's 13.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.68x | 0.54x | 1.55x | 1.81x | 2.14x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.37 | $212.75 | $356.00 | $79.48 | $36.44 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.16 | $63.81 | $35.18 | $12.44 | $15.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +13.9% | +49.3% | +93.6% | +98.1% | +86.4% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 44.8 | 41.9 | 55.6 | 69.7 | 60.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 59K | 2.3M | 378K | 1.9M | 2.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: INSM as "Buy", PRAX as "Buy", ARWR as "Buy", BEAM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 107.2% upside for INSM (target: $217) vs 4.2% for ARWR (target: $81).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $217.11 | $544.40 | $81.22 | $40.83 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 35 | 16 | 20 | 27 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
ARWR leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). PRAX leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
PULM vs INSM vs PRAX vs ARWR vs BEAM: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is PULM or INSM or PRAX or ARWR or BEAM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(ARWR) is the stronger pick with 232. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). Analysts rate Insmed Incorporated (INSM) a "Buy" — based on 35 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 — PULM or INSM or PRAX or ARWR or BEAM?
Over the past 5 years, Insmed Incorporated (INSM) delivered a total return of +221.
7%, compared to -92. 7% for Pulmatrix, Inc. (PULM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ARWR returned +1253% versus PULM's -99. 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 — PULM or INSM or PRAX or ARWR or BEAM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Insmed Incorporated (INSM) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
54β versus Beam Therapeutics Inc. 's 2. 14β — meaning BEAM is approximately 297% more volatile than INSM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 104% for Insmed Incorporated — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — PULM or INSM or PRAX or ARWR or BEAM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(ARWR) is pulling ahead at 232. 6% versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc. grew EPS 99. 8% year-over-year, compared to -32. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ARWR leads at 50. 5% 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 — PULM or INSM or PRAX or ARWR or BEAM?
Pulmatrix, Inc.
(PULM) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -210. 5% for Insmed Incorporated — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ARWR leads at 11. 9% versus -274. 6% for BEAM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ARWR leads at 97. 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — PULM or INSM or PRAX or ARWR or BEAM?
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 PULM or INSM or PRAX or ARWR or BEAM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Insmed Incorporated (INSM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.
54), +793. 5% 10Y return). Beam Therapeutics Inc. (BEAM) carries a higher beta of 2. 14 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (INSM: +793. 5%, BEAM: +67. 8%), 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 PULM and INSM and PRAX and ARWR and BEAM?
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: PULM is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INSM is a mid-cap high-growth stock; PRAX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ARWR is a mid-cap high-growth stock; BEAM 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.