Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
RGC vs ATHA vs PRAX vs NUVB vs CRL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
RGC vs ATHA vs PRAX vs NUVB vs CRL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $14.48B | $17M | $9.53B | $1.66B | $8.76B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $143M | $4.03B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-5M | $-129M | $-327M | $-146M | $-185M |
| Gross Margin | — | — | — | 91.6% | 31.9% |
| Operating Margin | — | — | — | -105.0% | 11.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | — | 16.0x |
| Total Debt | $86K | $803K | $110K | $10M | $3.07B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $3M | $69M | $357M | $164M | $214M |
RGC vs ATHA vs PRAX vs NUVB vs CRL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 21 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Regencell Bioscienc… (RGC) | 100 | 12134.3 | +12034.3% |
| Athira Pharma, Inc. (ATHA) | 100 | 4.9 | -95.1% |
| Praxis Precision Me… (PRAX) | 100 | 141.0 | +41.0% |
| Nuvation Bio Inc. (NUVB) | 100 | 55.4 | -44.6% |
| Charles River Labor… (CRL) | 100 | 43.6 | -56.4% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: RGC vs ATHA vs PRAX vs NUVB vs CRL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
RGC is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- beta 1.37
- 111.3% 10Y total return vs CRL's 114.0%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.37, Low D/E 1.0%, current ratio 41.92x
- Beta 1.37, current ratio 41.92x
Among these 5 stocks, ATHA doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
PRAX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for quality and momentum.
- 2.4% margin vs NUVB's -102.1%
- +7.7% vs CRL's +25.7%
NUVB ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 7.0%, EPS growth 71.6%
- 7.0% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0%
CRL is the clearest fit if your priority is efficiency.
- -2.5% ROA vs ATHA's -225.7%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 7.0% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0% | |
| Quality / Margins | 2.4% margin vs NUVB's -102.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.37 vs NUVB's 1.97, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +7.7% vs CRL's +25.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -2.5% ROA vs ATHA's -225.7% |
RGC vs ATHA vs PRAX vs NUVB vs CRL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
RGC vs ATHA vs PRAX vs NUVB vs CRL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
CRL leads in 1 of 6 categories
RGC leads 1 • ATHA leads 0 • PRAX leads 0 • NUVB leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — NUVB and CRL each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CRL and PRAX operate at a comparable scale, with $4.0B and $0 in trailing revenue. CRL is the more profitable business, keeping -4.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NUVB's -102.1%. On growth, NUVB holds the edge at +26.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $0 | $0 | $143M | $4.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$4M | -$110M | -$357M | -$145M | $824M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$5M | -$129M | -$327M | -$146M | -$185M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$7M | -$52M | -$283M | -$126M | $391M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | +91.6% | +31.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | -105.0% | +11.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | -102.1% | -4.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | -88.1% | +9.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | — | +26.0% | +1.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +24.8% | +2.7% | +106.3% | -160.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — RGC and ATHA and CRL each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $14.5B | $17M | $9.5B | $1.7B | $8.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $14.5B | -$30M | $9.2B | $1.5B | $11.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -3365.52x | -0.17x | -24.48x | -7.98x | -61.04x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | 16.00x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | 12.75x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | — | — | 26.44x | 2.18x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1761.63x | 0.37x | 8.46x | 5.35x | 2.74x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | 16.90x |
Profitability & Efficiency
CRL leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CRL delivers a -5.7% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-6 in annual profit, vs $-4 for ATHA. PRAX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CRL's 0.95x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), RGC scores 4/9 vs ATHA's 2/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -67.0% | -3.8% | -43.0% | -44.1% | -5.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -60.2% | -2.3% | -40.2% | -23.8% | -2.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -43.8% | — | -65.0% | -54.3% | +6.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -46.8% | -2.3% | -49.3% | -42.8% | +8.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.03x | 0.00x | 0.03x | 0.95x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$3M | -$68M | -$357M | -$154M | $2.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $3M | $69M | $357M | $164M | $214M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $85,741 | $803,000 | $110,000 | $10M | $3.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | — | -162.11x | 4.29x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RGC leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RGC five years ago would be worth $1,059,717 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $234 for ATHA. Over the past 12 months, PRAX leads with a +767.1% total return vs CRL's +25.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RGC at 2.5% vs ATHA's -46.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +42.6% | -37.6% | +15.2% | -44.2% | -12.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +424.7% | +62.5% | +767.1% | +128.1% | +25.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +4204.0% | -84.8% | +1956.2% | +195.7% | -6.5% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +10497.2% | -97.7% | -14.9% | -56.6% | -46.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +11134.2% | -97.5% | -20.9% | -52.1% | +114.0% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +2.5% | -46.7% | +174.0% | +43.5% | -2.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — RGC and PRAX each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
RGC is the less volatile stock with a 1.37 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NUVB's 1.97 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. PRAX currently trades 92.7% from its 52-week high vs RGC's 35.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.37x | 1.38x | 1.40x | 1.97x | 1.44x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $83.60 | $8.36 | $356.00 | $9.75 | $228.88 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.30 | $2.34 | $35.21 | $1.57 | $132.58 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +35.0% | +51.9% | +92.7% | +49.1% | +77.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 59.6 | 38.4 | 53.3 | 52.5 | 57.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 140K | 46K | 376K | 4.3M | 792K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: RGC as "Hold", PRAX as "Buy", NUVB as "Buy", CRL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 158.9% upside for NUVB (target: $12) vs 16.2% for CRL (target: $206).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | — | $548.80 | $12.40 | $206.43 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | — | 16 | 9 | 36 |
| 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% | +4.1% |
CRL leads in 1 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency). RGC leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
RGC vs ATHA vs PRAX vs NUVB vs CRL: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is RGC or ATHA or PRAX or NUVB or CRL a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Nuvation Bio Inc.
(NUVB) is the stronger pick with 699. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). Analysts rate Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX) a "Buy" — based on 16 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 — RGC or ATHA or PRAX or NUVB or CRL?
Over the past 5 years, Regencell Bioscience Holdings Limited (RGC) delivered a total return of +105.
0%, compared to -97. 7% for Athira Pharma, Inc. (ATHA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RGC returned +111. 3% versus ATHA's -97. 5%. 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 — RGC or ATHA or PRAX or NUVB or CRL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Regencell Bioscience Holdings Limited (RGC) is the lower-risk stock at 1.
37β versus Nuvation Bio Inc. 's 1. 97β — meaning NUVB is approximately 44% more volatile than RGC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 95% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — RGC or ATHA or PRAX or NUVB or CRL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Nuvation Bio Inc.
(NUVB) is pulling ahead at 699. 0% versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Nuvation Bio Inc. grew EPS 71. 6% year-over-year, compared to -1555. 0% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.. 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 — RGC or ATHA or PRAX or NUVB or CRL?
Regencell Bioscience Holdings Limited (RGC) is the more profitable company, earning 0.
0% net margin versus -325. 3% for Nuvation Bio Inc. — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CRL leads at 12. 6% versus -338. 7% for NUVB. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NUVB leads at 86. 6%, 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 RGC or ATHA or PRAX or NUVB or CRL more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NUVB: 158.
9% to $12. 40.
07Which pays a better dividend — RGC or ATHA or PRAX or NUVB or CRL?
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 RGC or ATHA or PRAX or NUVB or CRL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Regencell Bioscience Holdings Limited (RGC) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+111.
3% 10Y return). Nuvation Bio Inc. (NUVB) carries a higher beta of 1. 97 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (RGC: +111. 3%, NUVB: -52. 1%), 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 RGC and ATHA and PRAX and NUVB and CRL?
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: RGC is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ATHA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PRAX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NUVB is a small-cap high-growth stock; CRL 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.