Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
RAPP vs INVA vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
RAPP vs INVA vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General |
| Market Cap | $1.46B | $1.93B | $358.42B | $150.63B | $277.34B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $20M | $424M | $61.16B | $63.31B | $64.93B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-107M | $504M | $4.23B | $7.49B | $18.25B |
| Gross Margin | -1.3% | 76.2% | 70.2% | 69.3% | 74.2% |
| Operating Margin | -6.1% | 14.8% | 26.7% | 23.4% | 41.1% |
| Forward P/E | — | 11.9x | 14.3x | 8.9x | 21.9x |
| Total Debt | $11M | $269M | $69.07B | $67.42B | $50.53B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $53M | $551M | $5.23B | $1.14B | $14.56B |
RAPP vs INVA vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 24 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rapport Therapeutic… (RAPP) | 100 | 171.7 | +71.7% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 139.0 | +39.0% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 118.1 | +18.1% |
| Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | 100 | 94.6 | -5.4% |
| Merck & Co., Inc. (MRK) | 100 | 90.7 | -9.3% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RAPP vs INVA vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RAPP ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +290.7% vs ABBV's +11.3%
INVA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 18.5%, EPS growth 8.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.13, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 14.64x
- Beta 0.13, current ratio 14.64x
- 18.5% revenue growth vs RAPP's -20.9%
ABBV is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 295.5% 10Y total return vs INVA's 94.9%
PFE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.54, yield 6.5%
- Lower P/E (8.9x vs 14.3x)
- 6.5% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ABBV's 3.2%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
MRK is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 1.03 vs INVA's 1.15
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.5% revenue growth vs RAPP's -20.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (8.9x vs 14.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs RAPP's -5.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.13 vs RAPP's 1.55 | |
| Dividends | 6.5% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs ABBV's 3.2%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +290.7% vs ABBV's +11.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.4% ROA vs RAPP's -23.4%, ROIC 14.2% vs -27.1% |
RAPP vs INVA vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
RAPP vs INVA vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INVA leads in 3 of 6 categories
PFE leads 1 • RAPP leads 0 • ABBV leads 0 • MRK leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MRK is the larger business by revenue, generating $64.9B annually — 3246.3x RAPP's $20M. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RAPP's -5.4%. On growth, INVA holds the edge at +10.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $20M | $424M | $61.2B | $63.3B | $64.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$121M | $86M | $24.5B | $21.0B | $32.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$107M | $504M | $4.2B | $7.5B | $18.3B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$80M | $181M | $18.7B | $9.5B | $12.4B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -1.3% | +76.2% | +70.2% | +69.3% | +74.2% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.1% | +14.8% | +26.7% | +23.4% | +41.1% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -5.4% | +118.9% | +6.9% | +11.8% | +28.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -4.0% | +42.8% | +30.6% | +15.0% | +19.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +10.6% | +10.0% | +5.4% | +4.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +38.2% | +4.0% | +57.4% | -9.5% | -19.6% |
Valuation Metrics
INVA leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 92% valuation discount to ABBV's 85.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), INVA offers better value at 0.67x vs MRK's 0.73x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $1.5B | $1.9B | $358.4B | $150.6B | $277.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.4B | $1.7B | $422.3B | $216.9B | $313.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -13.96x | 6.91x | 85.50x | 19.47x | 15.42x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 11.91x | 14.28x | 8.94x | 21.93x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.67x | — | — | 0.73x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 8.10x | 14.96x | 10.66x | 10.68x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 4.55x | 5.86x | 2.41x | 4.27x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.87x | 1.65x | — | 1.74x | 5.35x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 9.88x | 20.12x | 16.60x | 22.44x |
Profitability & Efficiency
INVA leads this category, winning 3 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ABBV delivers a 62.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $62 in annual profit, vs $-25 for RAPP. RAPP carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MRK's 0.96x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), PFE scores 7/9 vs RAPP's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -24.8% | +46.5% | +62.1% | +8.3% | +36.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -23.4% | +32.4% | +3.1% | +3.6% | +14.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -27.1% | +14.2% | +23.9% | +7.5% | +22.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -31.3% | +12.4% | +21.5% | +9.0% | +23.8% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 0.23x | — | 0.78x | 0.96x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$41M | -$282M | $63.8B | $66.3B | $36.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $53M | $551M | $5.2B | $1.1B | $14.6B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $11M | $269M | $69.1B | $67.4B | $50.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 63.45x | 3.28x | 4.02x | 19.68x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — RAPP and INVA and ABBV each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABBV five years ago would be worth $20,131 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,674 for PFE. Over the past 12 months, RAPP leads with a +290.7% total return vs ABBV's +11.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors INVA at 25.0% vs PFE's -6.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +42.0% | +14.7% | -10.1% | +6.9% | +6.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +290.7% | +21.7% | +11.3% | +23.7% | +46.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +92.0% | +95.2% | +50.4% | -18.4% | +2.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +92.0% | +94.4% | +101.3% | -13.3% | +70.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +92.0% | +94.9% | +295.5% | +29.6% | +166.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +24.3% | +25.0% | +14.6% | -6.6% | +0.9% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — RAPP and INVA each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
INVA is the less volatile stock with a 0.13 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RAPP's 1.55 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. RAPP currently trades 94.5% from its 52-week high vs ABBV's 82.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.55x | 0.13x | 0.34x | 0.54x | 0.48x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $42.27 | $25.15 | $244.81 | $28.75 | $125.14 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $7.73 | $16.52 | $176.57 | $21.97 | $73.31 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +94.5% | +90.7% | +82.8% | +92.1% | +89.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 61.9 | 39.9 | 46.8 | 44.2 | 46.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 335K | 621K | 5.8M | 33.3M | 7.3M |
Analyst Outlook
PFE leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: RAPP as "Buy", INVA as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", PFE as "Hold", MRK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 65.2% upside for INVA (target: $38) vs 3.0% for PFE (target: $27). For income investors, PFE offers the higher dividend yield at 6.49% vs MRK's 2.90%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $49.00 | $37.67 | $256.64 | $27.27 | $129.31 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 5 | 10 | 41 | 39 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +3.2% | +6.5% | +2.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 13 | 15 | 14 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $6.57 | $1.72 | $3.26 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.2% | +0.3% | 0.0% | +1.8% |
INVA leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). PFE leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 2 tied.
RAPP vs INVA vs ABBV vs PFE vs MRK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RAPP or INVA or ABBV or PFE or MRK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the stronger pick with 18. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) offers the better valuation at 6. 9x trailing P/E (11. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Rapport Therapeutics, Inc. Common Stock (RAPP) a "Buy" — based on 5 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 — RAPP or INVA or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus AbbVie Inc. at 85. 5x. On forward P/E, Pfizer Inc. is actually cheaper at 8. 9x — 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: Merck & Co. , Inc. wins at 1. 03x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 1. 15x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — RAPP or INVA or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
Over the past 5 years, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) delivered a total return of +101. 3%, compared to -13. 3% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABBV returned +295. 5% versus PFE's +29. 6%. 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 — RAPP or INVA or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 13β versus Rapport Therapeutics, Inc. Common Stock's 1. 55β — meaning RAPP is approximately 1127% more volatile than INVA relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Rapport Therapeutics, Inc. Common Stock (RAPP) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 96% for Merck & Co. , Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — RAPP or INVA or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is pulling ahead at 18. 5% versus -1. 6% for Pfizer Inc. (PFE). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% year-over-year, compared to -3. 5% for Pfizer Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, INVA leads at 8. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — RAPP or INVA or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -536. 4% for Rapport Therapeutics, Inc. Common Stock — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INVA leads at 38. 5% versus -611. 0% for RAPP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — INVA leads at 72. 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.
07Is RAPP or INVA or ABBV or PFE or MRK 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, Merck & Co. , Inc. (MRK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 03x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 1. 15x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Pfizer Inc. (PFE) trades at 8. 9x forward P/E versus 21. 9x for Merck & Co. , Inc. — 13. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for INVA: 65. 2% to $37. 67.
08Which pays a better dividend — RAPP or INVA or ABBV or PFE or MRK?
In this comparison, PFE (6.
5% yield), ABBV (3. 2% yield), MRK (2. 9% yield) pay a dividend. RAPP, INVA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is RAPP or INVA or ABBV or PFE or MRK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 34), 3. 2% yield, +295. 5% 10Y return). Rapport Therapeutics, Inc. Common Stock (RAPP) carries a higher beta of 1. 55 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABBV: +295. 5%, RAPP: +92. 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.
10What are the main differences between RAPP and INVA and ABBV and PFE and MRK?
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: RAPP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; ABBV is a large-cap income-oriented stock; PFE is a mid-cap income-oriented stock; MRK is a large-cap deep-value stock. ABBV, PFE, MRK pay a dividend while RAPP, INVA 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.
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.