Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
SYRS vs KYMR vs ARVN vs IMVT vs TNGX
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
SYRS vs KYMR vs ARVN vs IMVT vs TNGX — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $11K | $6.91B | $652M | $5.53B | $3.19B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $386K | $51M | $263M | $0.00 | $62M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-98M | $-315M | $-81M | $-464M | $-102M |
| Gross Margin | -228.8% | 33.2% | 99.5% | — | 97.3% |
| Operating Margin | -288.9% | -7.0% | -44.0% | — | -178.4% |
| Total Debt | $62M | $82M | $9M | $98K | $34M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $140M | $357M | $143M | $714M | $112M |
SYRS vs KYMR vs ARVN vs IMVT vs TNGX — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Syros Pharmaceutica… (SYRS) | 100 | 0.0 | -100.0% |
| Kymera Therapeutics… (KYMR) | 100 | 250.9 | +150.9% |
| Arvinas, Inc. (ARVN) | 100 | 41.9 | -58.1% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 77.1 | -22.9% |
| Tango Therapeutics,… (TNGX) | 100 | 208.7 | +108.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: SYRS vs KYMR vs ARVN vs IMVT vs TNGX
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
SYRS lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
Among these 5 stocks, KYMR doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ARVN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 1.15
- Lower volatility, beta 1.15, Low D/E 2.0%, current ratio 4.92x
- Beta 1.15, current ratio 4.92x
- Beta 1.15 vs TNGX's 1.81, lower leverage
IMVT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 173.6% 10Y total return vs KYMR's 154.4%
- 3.2% margin vs SYRS's -253.4%
TNGX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 48.3%, EPS growth 26.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 35.9%
- 48.3% revenue growth vs SYRS's -33.2%
- +19.4% vs SYRS's -99.0%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 48.3% revenue growth vs SYRS's -33.2% | |
| Quality / Margins | 3.2% margin vs SYRS's -253.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.15 vs TNGX's 1.81, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +19.4% vs SYRS's -99.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -9.3% ROA vs SYRS's -115.1% |
SYRS vs KYMR vs ARVN vs IMVT vs TNGX — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
SYRS vs KYMR vs ARVN vs IMVT vs TNGX — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ARVN leads in 2 of 6 categories
SYRS leads 1 • TNGX leads 1 • KYMR leads 0 • IMVT leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ARVN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ARVN and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $263M and $0 in trailing revenue. ARVN is the more profitable business, keeping -30.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to SYRS's -253.4%. On growth, KYMR holds the edge at +55.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $386,000 | $51M | $263M | $0 | $62M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$110M | -$352M | -$111M | -$487M | -$109M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$98M | -$315M | -$81M | -$464M | -$102M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$100M | -$244M | -$276M | -$423M | -$140M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -2.3% | +33.2% | +99.5% | — | +97.3% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -288.9% | -7.0% | -44.0% | — | -178.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -253.4% | -6.1% | -30.8% | — | -162.9% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -259.2% | -4.7% | -105.0% | — | -2.2% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | +55.5% | -84.0% | — | -100.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +88.8% | +13.4% | -65.1% | +19.7% | +11.8% |
Valuation Metrics
SYRS leads this category, winning 2 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $10,733 | $6.9B | $652M | $5.5B | $3.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | -$77M | $6.6B | $517M | $4.8B | $3.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.00x | -22.93x | -7.96x | -9.97x | -26.99x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.00x | 176.26x | 2.48x | — | 51.17x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.00x | 4.52x | 1.52x | 5.83x | 7.88x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
ARVN leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ARVN delivers a -14.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-14 in annual profit, vs $-2 for SYRS. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to SYRS's 3.73x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KYMR scores 4/9 vs SYRS's 1/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.3% | -25.0% | -14.3% | -47.1% | -50.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -115.1% | -22.3% | -9.3% | -44.1% | -36.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | — | -24.9% | -22.4% | — | -38.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -74.7% | -27.2% | -16.0% | -66.1% | -34.0% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 3.73x | 0.05x | 0.02x | 0.00x | 0.10x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$77M | -$275M | -$134M | -$714M | -$79M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $140M | $357M | $143M | $714M | $112M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $62M | $82M | $9M | $98,000 | $34M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -17.35x | -2119.53x | — | — | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TNGX leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in TNGX five years ago would be worth $21,721 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $0 for SYRS. Over the past 12 months, TNGX leads with a +1941.7% total return vs SYRS's -99.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors TNGX at 89.7% vs SYRS's -94.9% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +100.0% | +16.3% | -11.2% | +5.1% | +162.9% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -99.0% | +190.7% | +52.8% | +96.1% | +1941.7% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +205.1% | -58.7% | +40.9% | +582.6% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +92.1% | -84.0% | +62.4% | +117.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -100.0% | +154.4% | -36.5% | +173.6% | +129.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -94.9% | +45.0% | -25.5% | +12.1% | +89.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ARVN and IMVT each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ARVN is the less volatile stock with a 1.15 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than TNGX's 1.81 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IMVT currently trades 90.5% from its 52-week high vs SYRS's 0.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.37x | 1.15x | 1.15x | 1.37x | 1.81x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $0.04 | $103.00 | $14.51 | $30.09 | $28.41 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.00 | $28.06 | $5.90 | $13.36 | $1.03 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +0.9% | +82.2% | +70.2% | +90.5% | +82.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.9 | 54.1 | 42.6 | 60.2 | 53.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 5K | 602K | 808K | 1.4M | 3.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: KYMR as "Buy", ARVN as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", TNGX as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 67.2% upside for IMVT (target: $46) vs -3.1% for TNGX (target: $23).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $117.06 | $13.00 | $45.50 | $22.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 26 | 26 | 23 | 10 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +14.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
ARVN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). SYRS leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
SYRS vs KYMR vs ARVN vs IMVT vs TNGX: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is SYRS or KYMR or ARVN or IMVT or TNGX a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Tango Therapeutics, Inc.
(TNGX) is the stronger pick with 48. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -33. 2% for Syros Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (SYRS). Analysts rate Kymera Therapeutics, Inc. (KYMR) a "Buy" — based on 26 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 — SYRS or KYMR or ARVN or IMVT or TNGX?
Over the past 5 years, Tango Therapeutics, Inc.
(TNGX) delivered a total return of +117. 2%, compared to -100. 0% for Syros Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (SYRS). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +173. 6% versus SYRS'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 — SYRS or KYMR or ARVN or IMVT or TNGX?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Arvinas, Inc.
(ARVN) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 15β versus Tango Therapeutics, Inc. 's 1. 81β — meaning TNGX is approximately 58% more volatile than ARVN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 4% for Syros Pharmaceuticals, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — SYRS or KYMR or ARVN or IMVT or TNGX?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Tango Therapeutics, Inc.
(TNGX) is pulling ahead at 48. 3% versus -33. 2% for Syros Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (SYRS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Arvinas, Inc. grew EPS 53. 8% year-over-year, compared to -45. 2% for Immunovant, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, TNGX leads at 35. 9% 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 — SYRS or KYMR or ARVN or IMVT or TNGX?
Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -1656. 3% for Syros Pharmaceuticals, 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 -1298. 2% for SYRS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KYMR leads at 100. 0%, 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 — SYRS or KYMR or ARVN or IMVT or TNGX?
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 SYRS or KYMR or ARVN or IMVT or TNGX better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Kymera Therapeutics, Inc.
(KYMR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 15), +154. 4% 10Y return). Tango Therapeutics, Inc. (TNGX) carries a higher beta of 1. 81 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (KYMR: +154. 4%, TNGX: +129. 5%), 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 SYRS and KYMR and ARVN and IMVT and TNGX?
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: SYRS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; KYMR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ARVN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TNGX is a small-cap high-growth 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.