Real Estate - Services
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
RFL vs CRIS vs IMVT vs MGNX vs RCUS
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
RFL vs CRIS vs IMVT vs MGNX vs RCUS — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Real Estate - Services | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $66M | $74M | $5.88B | $190M | $2.55B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $1M | $9M | $0.00 | $150M | $236M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-31M | $-8M | $-464M | $-75M | $-369M |
| Gross Margin | 80.0% | 99.5% | — | — | 90.7% |
| Operating Margin | -34.5% | -348.4% | — | -48.7% | -168.6% |
| Total Debt | $692K | $2M | $98K | $37M | $99M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $53M | $5M | $714M | $57M | $222M |
RFL vs CRIS vs IMVT vs MGNX vs RCUS — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rafael Holdings, In… (RFL) | 100 | 7.5 | -92.5% |
| Curis, Inc. (CRIS) | 100 | 3.4 | -96.6% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 112.8 | +12.8% |
| MacroGenics, Inc. (MGNX) | 100 | 15.6 | -84.4% |
| Arcus Biosciences, … (RCUS) | 100 | 80.9 | -19.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RFL vs CRIS vs IMVT vs MGNX vs RCUS
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RFL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- beta 0.99
- Rev growth 44.0%, EPS growth 28.3%, 3Y rev CAGR 30.8%
- 44.0% FFO/revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3%
- Beta 0.99 vs CRIS's 1.92, lower leverage
CRIS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if efficiency is your priority.
- -26.1% ROA vs IMVT's -44.1%
IMVT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 190.9% 10Y total return vs RCUS's 49.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.36, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 11.16x
- Beta 1.36, current ratio 11.16x
- 3.2% margin vs RFL's -30.4%
Among these 5 stocks, MGNX doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
RCUS is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +197.3% vs CRIS's -73.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 44.0% FFO/revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3% | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.2% margin vs RFL's -30.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.99 vs CRIS's 1.92, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +197.3% vs CRIS's -73.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -26.1% ROA vs IMVT's -44.1% |
RFL vs CRIS vs IMVT vs MGNX vs RCUS — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
RFL vs CRIS vs IMVT vs MGNX vs RCUS — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MGNX leads in 1 of 6 categories
RFL leads 1 • IMVT leads 1 • CRIS leads 0 • RCUS leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MGNX leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RCUS and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $236M and $0 in trailing revenue. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from -49.9% (MGNX) to -30.4% (RFL). On growth, MGNX holds the edge at +132.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $1M | $9M | $0 | $150M | $236M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$35M | -$33M | -$487M | -$73M | -$391M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$31M | -$8M | -$464M | -$75M | -$369M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$23M | -$27M | -$423M | -$83M | -$489M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +80.0% | +99.5% | — | — | +90.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -34.5% | -3.5% | — | -48.7% | -168.6% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -30.4% | -80.3% | — | -49.9% | -156.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -22.0% | -2.9% | — | -55.5% | -2.1% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +87.5% | -66.0% | — | +132.5% | -39.3% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +48.6% | +198.4% | +19.7% | +8.0% | +10.5% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — RFL and IMVT and MGNX each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $66M | $74M | $5.9B | $190M | $2.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $14M | $70M | $5.2B | $170M | $2.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.25x | -0.97x | -10.60x | -2.54x | -7.71x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 72.11x | 7.82x | — | 1.27x | 10.34x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.39x | 13.52x | 6.20x | 3.41x | 4.32x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
RFL leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
RFL delivers a -36.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-36 in annual profit, vs $-139 for CRIS. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MGNX's 0.66x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), RFL scores 4/9 vs RCUS's 0/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -36.4% | -138.8% | -47.1% | -120.2% | -69.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -30.5% | -26.1% | -44.1% | -29.9% | -35.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -29.6% | — | — | -18.8% | -64.1% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -27.2% | -2.3% | -66.1% | -34.7% | -42.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 0 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.30x | 0.00x | 0.66x | 0.16x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$52M | -$3M | -$714M | -$20M | -$123M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $53M | $5M | $714M | $57M | $222M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $692,000 | $2M | $98,000 | $37M | $99M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -39.68x | -107.35x | — | — | -13.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
IMVT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IMVT five years ago would be worth $18,445 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $29 for CRIS. Over the past 12 months, RCUS leads with a +197.3% total return vs CRIS's -73.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IMVT at 14.4% vs CRIS's -67.3% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +3.2% | -42.8% | +11.7% | +86.3% | +8.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -2.3% | -73.3% | +102.4% | +94.8% | +197.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -34.7% | -96.5% | +49.8% | -58.6% | +27.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.0% | -99.7% | +84.4% | -90.2% | -12.1% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -73.5% | -99.7% | +190.9% | -84.0% | +49.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -13.2% | -67.3% | +14.4% | -25.4% | +8.5% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — RFL and IMVT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
RFL is the less volatile stock with a 0.99 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CRIS's 1.92 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IMVT currently trades 96.2% from its 52-week high vs CRIS's 17.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.99x | 1.92x | 1.36x | 1.76x | 1.84x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.19 | $3.13 | $30.09 | $3.88 | $28.72 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.12 | $0.49 | $13.36 | $1.19 | $7.72 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +40.8% | +17.9% | +96.2% | +77.3% | +88.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 52.0 | 43.6 | 50.6 | 42.6 | 52.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 84K | 446K | 1.4M | 1.1M | 1.2M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: IMVT as "Buy", MGNX as "Buy", RCUS as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 100.0% upside for MGNX (target: $6) vs 18.3% for RCUS (target: $30).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $45.50 | $6.00 | $30.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | — | 23 | 22 | 18 |
| 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% | 0.0% |
MGNX leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). RFL leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
RFL vs CRIS vs IMVT vs MGNX vs RCUS: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RFL or CRIS or IMVT or MGNX or RCUS a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Rafael Holdings, Inc.
(RFL) is the stronger pick with 44. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 4% for Curis, Inc. (CRIS). Analysts rate Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) a "Buy" — based on 23 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 — RFL or CRIS or IMVT or MGNX or RCUS?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +84. 4%, compared to -99. 7% for Curis, Inc. (CRIS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +190. 9% versus CRIS'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 — RFL or CRIS or IMVT or MGNX or RCUS?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Rafael Holdings, Inc.
(RFL) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 99β versus Curis, Inc. 's 1. 92β — meaning CRIS is approximately 93% more volatile than RFL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 66% for MacroGenics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — RFL or CRIS or IMVT or MGNX or RCUS?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Rafael Holdings, Inc.
(RFL) is pulling ahead at 44. 0% versus -13. 4% for Curis, Inc. (CRIS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Curis, Inc. grew EPS 91. 6% year-over-year, compared to -45. 2% for Immunovant, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, RFL leads at 30. 8% 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 — RFL or CRIS or IMVT or MGNX or RCUS?
Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -33. 3% for Rafael Holdings, Inc. — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IMVT leads at 0. 0% versus -28. 5% for RFL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CRIS leads at 99. 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 — RFL or CRIS or IMVT or MGNX or RCUS?
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 RFL or CRIS or IMVT or MGNX or RCUS better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Rafael Holdings, Inc.
(RFL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 99)). Curis, Inc. (CRIS) carries a higher beta of 1. 92 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (RFL: -73. 5%, CRIS: -99. 7%), 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 RFL and CRIS and IMVT and MGNX and RCUS?
These companies operate in different sectors (RFL (Real Estate) and CRIS (Healthcare) and IMVT (Healthcare) and MGNX (Healthcare) and RCUS (Healthcare)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: RFL is a small-cap high-growth stock; CRIS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; MGNX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; RCUS is a small-cap quality compounder 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.