Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
SBFM vs DBVT vs CRVS vs IMVT
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
SBFM vs DBVT vs CRVS vs IMVT — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $737K | $1690.08T | $1.31B | $5.88B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $36M | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-6M | $-168M | $-44M | $-464M |
| Gross Margin | 33.3% | — | — | — |
| Operating Margin | -17.9% | — | — | — |
| Total Debt | $952K | $22M | $937K | $98K |
| Cash & Equiv. | $10M | $194M | $5M | $714M |
SBFM vs DBVT vs CRVS vs IMVT — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sunshine Biopharma,… (SBFM) | 100 | 0.6 | -99.4% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 40.7 | -59.3% |
| Corvus Pharmaceutic… (CRVS) | 100 | 450.7 | +350.7% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 112.8 | +12.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SBFM vs DBVT vs CRVS vs IMVT
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SBFM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 44.7%, EPS growth 97.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 434.5%
- 44.7% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0%
- -19.7% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0%
DBVT is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 1.26
- Beta 1.26 vs CRVS's 1.57
CRVS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and momentum is your priority.
- 3.5% margin vs SBFM's -17.4%
- +364.2% vs SBFM's -14.6%
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 190.9% 10Y total return vs CRVS's 24.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 1.36, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 11.16x
- Beta 1.36, current ratio 11.16x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 44.7% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0% | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.5% margin vs SBFM's -17.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.26 vs CRVS's 1.57 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +364.2% vs SBFM's -14.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -19.7% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0% |
SBFM vs DBVT vs CRVS vs IMVT — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
DBVT leads in 1 of 6 categories
SBFM leads 1 • CRVS leads 1 • IMVT leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
DBVT leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
SBFM and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $36M and $0 in trailing revenue.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $36M | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$6M | -$112M | -$48M | -$487M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$6M | -$168M | -$44M | -$464M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$9M | -$151M | -$35M | -$423M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +33.3% | — | — | — |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -17.9% | — | — | — |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -17.4% | — | — | — |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -26.1% | — | — | — |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.2% | — | — | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +21.5% | +91.5% | -15.4% | +19.7% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — SBFM and CRVS each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $736,836 | $1690.08T | $1.3B | $5.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$8M | $1690.08T | $1.3B | $5.2B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.14x | -0.75x | -29.34x | -10.60x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.02x | — | — | — |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.03x | 0.65x | 20.26x | 6.20x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
SBFM leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
SBFM delivers a -24.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-25 in annual profit, vs $-130 for DBVT. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to DBVT's 0.13x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), DBVT scores 4/9 vs SBFM's 1/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -24.6% | -130.2% | -38.9% | -47.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -19.7% | -89.0% | -35.7% | -44.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -42.9% | — | -78.1% | — |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -25.2% | -145.7% | -90.2% | -66.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 2 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 0.13x | 0.02x | 0.00x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$9M | -$172M | -$4M | -$714M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $10M | $194M | $5M | $714M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $952,480 | $22M | $937,000 | $98,000 |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -757.53x | -189.82x | -18.29x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CRVS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CRVS five years ago would be worth $60,742 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $1 for SBFM. Over the past 12 months, CRVS leads with a +364.2% total return vs SBFM's -14.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CRVS at 128.7% vs SBFM's -89.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -18.0% | +3.6% | +112.4% | +11.7% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -14.6% | +100.5% | +364.2% | +102.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.9% | +18.1% | +1096.2% | +49.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -68.3% | +507.4% | +84.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | -87.1% | +24.8% | +190.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -89.9% | +5.7% | +128.7% | +14.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — DBVT and IMVT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
DBVT is the less volatile stock with a 1.26 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CRVS's 1.57 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 SBFM's 43.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.33x | 1.26x | 1.57x | 1.36x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.43 | $26.18 | $26.95 | $30.09 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.95 | $7.53 | $3.17 | $13.36 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +43.2% | +75.3% | +57.7% | +96.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.2 | 47.4 | 44.2 | 50.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 37K | 252K | 1.2M | 1.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: DBVT as "Buy", CRVS as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 134.8% upside for DBVT (target: $46) vs 57.2% for IMVT (target: $46).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $46.33 | $33.17 | $45.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 15 | 13 | 23 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +100.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
DBVT leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). SBFM leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 2 tied.
SBFM vs DBVT vs CRVS vs IMVT: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SBFM or DBVT or CRVS or IMVT a better buy right now?
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 — SBFM or DBVT or CRVS or IMVT?
Over the past 5 years, Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(CRVS) delivered a total return of +507. 4%, compared to -100. 0% for Sunshine Biopharma, Inc. (SBFM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +190. 9% versus SBFM's -100. 0%. 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 — SBFM or DBVT or CRVS or IMVT?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), DBV Technologies S.
A. (DBVT) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 26β versus Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 1. 57β — meaning CRVS is approximately 24% more volatile than DBVT relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 13% for DBV Technologies S. A. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — SBFM or DBVT or CRVS or IMVT?
On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Sunshine Biopharma, Inc.
grew EPS 97. 9% year-over-year, compared to -347. 5% for DBV Technologies S. A.. 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 — SBFM or DBVT or CRVS or IMVT?
DBV Technologies S.
A. (DBVT) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -14. 7% for Sunshine Biopharma, Inc. — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: DBVT leads at 0. 0% versus -16. 7% for SBFM. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SBFM leads at 30. 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.
06Which pays a better dividend — SBFM or DBVT or CRVS or IMVT?
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 SBFM or DBVT or CRVS or IMVT better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (+190. 9% 10Y return). Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (CRVS) carries a higher beta of 1. 57 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (IMVT: +190. 9%, CRVS: +24. 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 SBFM and DBVT and CRVS and IMVT?
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: SBFM is a small-cap high-growth stock; DBVT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; CRVS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IMVT 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.