Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SUPN vs DBVT vs PRGO vs IQV vs MCK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Distribution
SUPN vs DBVT vs PRGO vs IQV vs MCK — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Distribution |
| Market Cap | $3.01B | $1712.35T | $1.61B | $30.32B | $92.15B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $777M | $0.00 | $4.18B | $16.63B | $403.43B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-29M | $-168M | $-1.82B | $1.39B | $4.76B |
| Gross Margin | 89.4% | — | 34.2% | 26.1% | 3.6% |
| Operating Margin | -5.5% | — | -4.1% | 13.9% | 1.5% |
| Forward P/E | 24.1x | — | 5.5x | 14.1x | 16.7x |
| Total Debt | $41M | $22M | $3.97B | $16.17B | $7.39B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $128M | $194M | $532M | $1.98B | $5.69B |
SUPN vs DBVT vs PRGO vs IQV vs MCK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Supernus Pharmaceut… (SUPN) | 100 | 213.6 | +113.6% |
| DBV Technologies S.… (DBVT) | 100 | 40.7 | -59.3% |
| Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) | 100 | 21.4 | -78.6% |
| IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) | 100 | 119.5 | +19.5% |
| McKesson Corporation (MCK) | 100 | 464.2 | +364.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SUPN vs DBVT vs PRGO vs IQV vs MCK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SUPN is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.78, Low D/E 3.9%, current ratio 1.90x
DBVT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +110.4% vs PRGO's -51.2%
PRGO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and defensive is your priority.
- Dividend streak 10 yrs, beta 1.18, yield 9.8%
- Beta 1.18, yield 9.8%, current ratio 2.76x
- Lower P/E (5.5x vs 16.7x)
- 9.8% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs MCK's 0.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
IQV is the clearest fit if your priority is valuation efficiency.
- PEG 0.35 vs MCK's 0.43
- 8.3% margin vs PRGO's -43.5%
MCK carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 16.2%, EPS growth 14.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 10.8%
- 348.1% 10Y total return vs SUPN's 228.4%
- 16.2% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0%
- Beta 0.04 vs IQV's 1.33
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 16.2% revenue growth vs DBVT's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (5.5x vs 16.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 8.3% margin vs PRGO's -43.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.04 vs IQV's 1.33 | |
| Dividends | 9.8% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs MCK's 0.4%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +110.4% vs PRGO's -51.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.7% ROA vs DBVT's -89.0% |
SUPN vs DBVT vs PRGO vs IQV vs MCK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
SUPN vs DBVT vs PRGO vs IQV vs MCK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
MCK leads in 2 of 6 categories
IQV leads 1 • PRGO leads 1 • SUPN leads 0 • DBVT leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
IQV leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MCK and DBVT operate at a comparable scale, with $403.4B and $0 in trailing revenue. IQV is the more profitable business, keeping 8.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PRGO's -43.5%. On growth, SUPN holds the edge at +38.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $777M | $0 | $4.2B | $16.6B | $403.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $29M | -$112M | $58M | $3.5B | $6.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$29M | -$168M | -$1.8B | $1.4B | $4.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $82M | -$151M | $108M | $2.7B | $6.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +89.4% | — | +34.2% | +26.1% | +3.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -5.5% | — | -4.1% | +13.9% | +1.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.7% | — | -43.5% | +8.3% | +1.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +10.6% | — | +2.6% | +16.1% | +1.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +38.6% | — | -7.2% | +8.4% | +6.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +81.0% | +91.5% | -56.4% | +15.0% | +37.0% |
Valuation Metrics
PRGO leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 22.8x trailing earnings, IQV trades at a 22% valuation discount to MCK's 29.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), IQV offers better value at 0.56x vs MCK's 0.75x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.0B | $1712.35T | $1.6B | $30.3B | $92.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $2.9B | $1712.35T | $5.1B | $44.5B | $93.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -76.88x | -0.76x | -1.14x | 22.79x | 29.25x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 24.12x | — | 5.53x | 14.06x | 16.66x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.56x | 0.75x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 53.44x | — | 7.42x | 12.97x | 18.74x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.19x | — | 0.38x | 1.86x | 0.26x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.78x | 0.66x | 0.55x | 4.67x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 65.45x | — | 11.12x | 14.78x | 17.63x |
Profitability & Efficiency
MCK leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MCK delivers a 3.0% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $3 in annual profit, vs $-130 for DBVT. SUPN carries lower financial leverage with a 0.04x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to IQV's 2.44x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MCK scores 6/9 vs IQV's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.7% | -130.2% | -50.7% | +22.1% | +3.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -2.0% | -89.0% | -19.8% | +4.7% | +5.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -2.8% | — | +3.7% | +8.7% | +5.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -3.4% | -145.7% | +4.3% | +11.0% | +30.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.04x | 0.13x | 1.35x | 2.44x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$87M | -$172M | $3.4B | $14.2B | $1.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $128M | $194M | $532M | $2.0B | $5.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $41M | $22M | $4.0B | $16.2B | $7.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -189.82x | -7.20x | 3.10x | 33.79x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MCK leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in MCK five years ago would be worth $38,689 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,090 for DBVT. Over the past 12 months, DBVT leads with a +110.4% total return vs PRGO's -51.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MCK at 27.3% vs PRGO's -25.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +5.7% | +4.9% | -13.5% | -20.7% | -8.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +69.0% | +110.4% | -51.2% | +16.5% | +4.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +42.1% | +19.7% | -58.1% | -5.9% | +106.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +78.0% | -69.1% | -60.1% | -23.8% | +286.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +228.4% | -87.0% | -77.7% | +166.5% | +348.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +12.4% | +6.2% | -25.2% | -2.0% | +27.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — SUPN and MCK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
MCK is the less volatile stock with a 0.04 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than IQV's 1.33 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. SUPN currently trades 87.6% from its 52-week high vs PRGO's 41.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.78x | 1.26x | 1.21x | 1.32x | -0.02x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $59.68 | $26.18 | $28.44 | $247.05 | $999.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $29.16 | $7.53 | $9.23 | $134.65 | $637.00 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +87.6% | +76.3% | +41.2% | +72.3% | +75.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 57.9 | 48.1 | 60.9 | 58.5 | 16.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 604K | 252K | 3.4M | 1.6M | 757K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — PRGO and MCK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: SUPN as "Buy", DBVT as "Buy", PRGO as "Hold", IQV as "Buy", MCK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 208.9% upside for PRGO (target: $36) vs 14.8% for SUPN (target: $60). For income investors, PRGO offers the higher dividend yield at 9.81% vs MCK's 0.36%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Hold | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $60.00 | $46.33 | $36.20 | $225.63 | $994.86 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 15 | 36 | 44 | 31 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +9.8% | — | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 10 | 2 | 17 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $1.15 | — | $2.69 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +4.1% | +3.4% |
MCK leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). IQV leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
SUPN vs DBVT vs PRGO vs IQV vs MCK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SUPN or DBVT or PRGO or IQV or MCK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the stronger pick with 16.
2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 8% for Perrigo Company plc (PRGO). IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) offers the better valuation at 22. 8x trailing P/E (14. 1x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (SUPN) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — SUPN or DBVT or PRGO or IQV or MCK?
On trailing P/E, IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the cheapest at 22. 8x versus McKesson Corporation at 29. 2x. On forward P/E, Perrigo Company plc is actually cheaper at 5. 5x — 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: IQVIA Holdings Inc. wins at 0. 35x versus McKesson Corporation's 0. 43x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — SUPN or DBVT or PRGO or IQV or MCK?
Over the past 5 years, McKesson Corporation (MCK) delivered a total return of +286.
9%, compared to -69. 1% for DBV Technologies S. A. (DBVT). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MCK returned +339. 0% versus DBVT's -87. 1%. 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 — SUPN or DBVT or PRGO or IQV or MCK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
02β versus IQVIA Holdings Inc. 's 1. 32β — meaning IQV is approximately -8148% more volatile than MCK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (SUPN) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 4% versus 2% for IQVIA Holdings Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — SUPN or DBVT or PRGO or IQV or MCK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), McKesson Corporation (MCK) is pulling ahead at 16.
2% versus -2. 8% for Perrigo Company plc (PRGO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: McKesson Corporation grew EPS 14. 9% year-over-year, compared to -723. 2% for Perrigo Company plc. Over a 3-year CAGR, MCK leads at 10. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — SUPN or DBVT or PRGO or IQV or MCK?
IQVIA Holdings Inc.
(IQV) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 3% net margin versus -33. 5% for Perrigo Company plc — meaning it keeps 8. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: IQV leads at 14. 0% versus -5. 1% for SUPN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SUPN leads at 89. 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.
07Is SUPN or DBVT or PRGO or IQV or MCK 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, IQVIA Holdings Inc. (IQV) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 35x versus McKesson Corporation's 0. 43x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) trades at 5. 5x forward P/E versus 24. 1x for Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. — 18. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PRGO: 208. 9% to $36. 20.
08Which pays a better dividend — SUPN or DBVT or PRGO or IQV or MCK?
In this comparison, PRGO (9.
8% yield), MCK (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. SUPN, DBVT, IQV do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is SUPN or DBVT or PRGO or IQV or MCK better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
02), +339. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MCK: +339. 0%, DBVT: -87. 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.
10What are the main differences between SUPN and DBVT and PRGO and IQV and MCK?
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: SUPN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; DBVT is a mega-cap quality compounder stock; PRGO is a small-cap income-oriented stock; IQV is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; MCK is a mid-cap high-growth stock. PRGO pays a dividend while SUPN, DBVT, IQV, MCK 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.