Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
TIL vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
TIL vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $54M | $240M | $4.80B | $1.36B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $6M | $4M | $66M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-47M | $-130M | $-569M | $-395M |
| Gross Margin | — | 53.8% | -53.6% | -31.9% |
| Operating Margin | — | -22.1% | -134.1% | -6.4% |
| Total Debt | $85M | $78M | $395M | $93M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $7M | $47M | $355M | $155M |
TIL vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Instil Bio, Inc. (TIL) | 100 | 1.6 | -98.4% |
| Fate Therapeutics, … (FATE) | 100 | 2.5 | -97.5% |
| CRISPR Therapeutics… (CRSP) | 100 | 40.9 | -59.1% |
| Intellia Therapeuti… (NTLA) | 100 | 15.1 | -84.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TIL vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TIL carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 1.55
- Lower volatility, beta 1.55, Low D/E 74.8%, current ratio 39.53x
- Beta 1.55, current ratio 39.53x
- 37.2% revenue growth vs CRSP's -90.0%
FATE is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.
- +47.1% vs TIL's -78.9%
CRSP is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 253.4% 10Y total return vs NTLA's -54.5%
NTLA is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 16.9%, EPS growth 27.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 9.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 37.2% revenue growth vs CRSP's -90.0% | |
| Quality / Margins | -1.0% margin vs CRSP's -138.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.55 vs NTLA's 2.28 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +47.1% vs TIL's -78.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | -22.4% ROA vs NTLA's -46.1%, ROIC -18.0% vs -44.0% |
TIL vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
TIL vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
NTLA leads in 1 of 6 categories
CRSP leads 1 • TIL leads 0 • FATE leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTLA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
NTLA and TIL operate at a comparable scale, with $66M and $0 in trailing revenue. NTLA is the more profitable business, keeping -6.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRSP's -138.6%. On growth, CRSP holds the edge at +68.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $6M | $4M | $66M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$54M | -$127M | -$531M | -$411M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$47M | -$130M | -$569M | -$395M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$34M | -$108M | -$401M | -$364M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +53.8% | -53.6% | -31.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | -22.1% | -134.1% | -6.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -20.6% | -138.6% | -6.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | -17.1% | -97.8% | -5.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | -20.3% | +68.6% | -9.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +85.6% | +18.8% | +19.0% | +26.4% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — TIL and CRSP and NTLA each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $54M | $240M | $4.8B | $1.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $132M | $271M | $4.8B | $1.3B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.74x | -1.79x | -7.70x | -3.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 36.13x | 1368.42x | 20.08x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.46x | 1.18x | 2.33x | 1.95x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — TIL and NTLA each lead in 3 of 8 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CRSP delivers a -30.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $-31 in annual profit, vs $-59 for FATE. NTLA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.14x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to TIL's 0.75x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), NTLA scores 4/9 vs CRSP's 1/9, reflecting mixed financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -39.8% | -58.9% | -30.9% | -57.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -22.4% | -39.4% | -24.5% | -46.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -18.0% | -36.5% | -22.3% | -44.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -23.3% | -43.1% | -26.6% | -48.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.75x | 0.38x | 0.21x | 0.14x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $79M | $31M | $40M | -$62M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $7M | $47M | $355M | $155M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $85M | $78M | $395M | $93M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -8.24x | — | — | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CRSP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CRSP five years ago would be worth $3,868 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $229 for FATE. Over the past 12 months, FATE leads with a +47.1% total return vs TIL's -78.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CRSP at -6.0% vs NTLA's -34.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -29.7% | +108.1% | -7.4% | +31.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -78.9% | +47.1% | +20.6% | +45.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -29.8% | -61.9% | -16.9% | -72.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -97.6% | -97.7% | -61.3% | -86.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.5% | +15.7% | +253.4% | -54.5% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -11.1% | -27.5% | -6.0% | -34.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — TIL and FATE each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TIL is the less volatile stock with a 1.55 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than NTLA's 2.28 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FATE currently trades 71.5% from its 52-week high vs TIL's 20.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.55x | 1.93x | 1.89x | 2.28x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $38.50 | $2.88 | $78.48 | $28.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.67 | $0.91 | $39.81 | $7.95 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +20.6% | +71.5% | +63.5% | +42.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 40.9 | 47.8 | 45.6 | 43.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 26K | 3.2M | 1.7M | 6.3M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: FATE as "Buy", CRSP as "Buy", NTLA as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 167.0% upside for FATE (target: $6) vs 43.9% for CRSP (target: $72).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $5.50 | $71.67 | $26.29 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 31 | 38 | 39 |
| 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% |
NTLA leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). CRSP leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
TIL vs FATE vs CRSP vs NTLA: Key Questions Answered
8 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TIL or FATE or CRSP or NTLA a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Intellia Therapeutics, Inc.
(NTLA) is the stronger pick with 16. 9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -90. 0% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP). Analysts rate Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE) a "Buy" — based on 31 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 — TIL or FATE or CRSP or NTLA?
Over the past 5 years, CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP) delivered a total return of -61.
3%, compared to -97. 7% for Fate Therapeutics, Inc. (FATE). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CRSP returned +253. 4% versus TIL's -98. 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 — TIL or FATE or CRSP or NTLA?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Instil Bio, Inc.
(TIL) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 55β versus Intellia Therapeutics, Inc. 's 2. 28β — meaning NTLA is approximately 47% more volatile than TIL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Intellia Therapeutics, Inc. (NTLA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 14% versus 75% for Instil Bio, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — TIL or FATE or CRSP or NTLA?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Intellia Therapeutics, Inc.
(NTLA) is pulling ahead at 16. 9% versus -90. 0% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG (CRSP). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Fate Therapeutics, Inc. grew EPS 29. 9% year-over-year, compared to -49. 1% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG. Over a 3-year CAGR, CRSP leads at 100. 4% 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 — TIL or FATE or CRSP or NTLA?
Instil Bio, Inc.
(TIL) is the more profitable company, earning 0. 0% net margin versus -165. 7% for CRISPR Therapeutics AG — meaning it keeps 0. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: TIL leads at 0. 0% versus -161. 9% for CRSP. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — NTLA leads at 76. 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 — TIL or FATE or CRSP or NTLA?
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 TIL or FATE or CRSP or NTLA better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Instil Bio, Inc.
(TIL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding. Intellia Therapeutics, Inc. (NTLA) carries a higher beta of 2. 28 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (TIL: -98. 5%, NTLA: -54. 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 TIL and FATE and CRSP and NTLA?
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: TIL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FATE is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CRSP is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NTLA 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.