Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
TLPH vs INVA vs PRGO vs MCK
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Medical - Distribution
TLPH vs INVA vs PRGO 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 - Distribution |
| Market Cap | $43M | $1.93B | $1.61B | $92.15B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $28K | $424M | $4.18B | $403.43B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-14M | $504M | $-1.82B | $4.76B |
| Gross Margin | -40.8% | 76.2% | 34.2% | 3.6% |
| Operating Margin | -481.6% | 14.8% | -4.1% | 1.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | 11.9x | 5.6x | 19.3x |
| Total Debt | $0.00 | $269M | $3.97B | $7.39B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $6M | $551M | $532M | $5.69B |
TLPH vs INVA vs PRGO vs MCK — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Talphera, Inc. (TLPH) | 100 | 3.2 | -96.8% |
| Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) | 100 | 163.2 | +63.2% |
| Perrigo Company plc (PRGO) | 100 | 21.4 | -78.6% |
| McKesson Corporation (MCK) | 100 | 474.1 | +374.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TLPH vs INVA vs PRGO vs MCK
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TLPH is the clearest fit if your priority is momentum.
- +70.5% vs PRGO's -51.2%
INVA carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 18.5%, EPS growth 8.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.7%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.13, Low D/E 22.9%, current ratio 14.64x
- 18.5% revenue growth vs TLPH's -18.2%
- 118.9% margin vs TLPH's -510.4%
PRGO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if value and dividends is your priority.
- Better valuation composite
- 9.8% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs MCK's 0.4%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
MCK is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 17 yrs, beta 0.04, yield 0.4%
- 348.1% 10Y total return vs INVA's 94.9%
- PEG 0.49 vs INVA's 1.15
- Beta 0.04, yield 0.4%, current ratio 0.90x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.5% revenue growth vs TLPH's -18.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 118.9% margin vs TLPH's -510.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.04 vs PRGO's 1.18 | |
| Dividends | 9.8% yield, 10-year raise streak, vs MCK's 0.4%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +70.5% vs PRGO's -51.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 32.4% ROA vs TLPH's -62.2%, ROIC 14.2% vs -120.3% |
TLPH vs INVA vs PRGO vs MCK — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
TLPH vs INVA vs PRGO vs MCK — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
INVA leads in 1 of 6 categories
PRGO leads 1 • MCK leads 1 • TLPH leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
INVA leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MCK is the larger business by revenue, generating $403.4B annually — 14408214.3x TLPH's $28,000. INVA is the more profitable business, keeping 118.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TLPH's -510.4%. On growth, INVA holds the edge at +10.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $28,000 | $424M | $4.2B | $403.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$11M | $86M | $58M | $6.8B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$14M | $504M | -$1.8B | $4.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$11M | $181M | $108M | $6.0B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -40.8% | +76.2% | +34.2% | +3.6% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -481.6% | +14.8% | -4.1% | +1.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -510.4% | +118.9% | -43.5% | +1.2% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -405.9% | +42.8% | +2.6% | +1.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +10.6% | -7.2% | +6.0% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +56.1% | +4.0% | -56.4% | +37.0% |
Valuation Metrics
PRGO leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 6.9x trailing earnings, INVA trades at a 76% valuation discount to MCK's 29.2x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), INVA offers better value at 0.67x vs MCK's 0.75x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $43M | $1.9B | $1.6B | $92.1B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $37M | $1.7B | $5.1B | $93.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.58x | 6.91x | -1.14x | 29.25x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 11.91x | 5.56x | 19.28x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 0.67x | — | 0.75x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 8.10x | 7.42x | 18.74x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 1547.32x | 4.55x | 0.38x | 0.26x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.19x | 1.65x | 0.55x | — |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 9.88x | 11.12x | 17.63x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — INVA and MCK each lead in 4 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 $-118 for TLPH. INVA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.23x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to PRGO's 1.35x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), MCK scores 6/9 vs PRGO's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -118.0% | +46.5% | -50.7% | +3.0% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -62.2% | +32.4% | -19.8% | +5.7% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -120.3% | +14.2% | +3.7% | +5.4% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -65.0% | +12.4% | +4.3% | +30.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.23x | 1.35x | — |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$6M | -$282M | $3.4B | $1.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $6M | $551M | $532M | $5.7B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $0 | $269M | $4.0B | $7.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 63.45x | -7.20x | 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 $385 for TLPH. Over the past 12 months, TLPH leads with a +70.5% 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 | -24.3% | +14.7% | -13.5% | -8.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +70.5% | +21.7% | -51.2% | +4.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +18.7% | +95.2% | -58.1% | +106.4% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -96.1% | +94.4% | -60.1% | +286.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.6% | +94.9% | -77.7% | +348.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +5.9% | +25.0% | -25.2% | +27.3% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — INVA 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 PRGO's 1.18 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. INVA currently trades 90.7% 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 | 1.10x | 0.13x | 1.18x | 0.04x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $1.57 | $25.15 | $28.44 | $999.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.38 | $16.52 | $9.23 | $637.00 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +55.9% | +90.7% | +41.2% | +75.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 55.7 | 39.9 | 60.9 | 16.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 164K | 621K | 3.4M | 757K |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — PRGO and MCK each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: INVA as "Buy", PRGO as "Hold", MCK as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 70.6% upside for PRGO (target: $20) vs 33.8% for MCK (target: $1007). For income investors, PRGO offers the higher dividend yield at 9.81% vs MCK's 0.36%.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Hold | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $37.67 | $20.00 | $1006.50 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 10 | 36 | 31 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +9.8% | +0.4% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 10 | 17 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $1.15 | $2.69 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.2% | 0.0% | +3.4% |
INVA leads in 1 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow). PRGO leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 3 tied.
TLPH vs INVA vs PRGO vs MCK: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TLPH or INVA or PRGO or MCK a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the stronger pick with 18. 5% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -2. 8% for Perrigo Company plc (PRGO). Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) offers the better valuation at 6. 9x trailing P/E (11. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) a "Buy" — based on 10 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 — TLPH or INVA or PRGO or MCK?
On trailing P/E, Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the cheapest at 6. 9x versus McKesson Corporation at 29. 2x. On forward P/E, Perrigo Company plc is actually cheaper at 5. 6x — 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: McKesson Corporation wins at 0. 49x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 1. 15x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TLPH or INVA or PRGO or MCK?
Over the past 5 years, McKesson Corporation (MCK) delivered a total return of +286.
9%, compared to -96. 1% for Talphera, Inc. (TLPH). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MCK returned +348. 1% versus TLPH's -98. 6%. 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 — TLPH or INVA or PRGO or MCK?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
04β versus Perrigo Company plc's 1. 18β — meaning PRGO is approximately 2641% more volatile than MCK relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Innoviva, Inc. (INVA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 23% versus 135% for Perrigo Company plc — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TLPH or INVA or PRGO or MCK?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is pulling ahead at 18. 5% versus -2. 8% for Perrigo Company plc (PRGO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Innoviva, Inc. grew EPS 816. 7% 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 — TLPH or INVA or PRGO or MCK?
Innoviva, Inc.
(INVA) is the more profitable company, earning 63. 8% net margin versus -510. 4% for Talphera, Inc. — meaning it keeps 63. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: INVA leads at 38. 5% versus -481. 6% for TLPH. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — INVA leads at 72. 3%, 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 TLPH or INVA or PRGO 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, McKesson Corporation (MCK) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 49x versus Innoviva, Inc. 's 1. 15x. 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. 6x forward P/E versus 19. 3x for McKesson Corporation — 13. 7x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PRGO: 70. 6% to $20. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — TLPH or INVA or PRGO or MCK?
In this comparison, PRGO (9.
8% yield), MCK (0. 4% yield) pay a dividend. TLPH, INVA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is TLPH or INVA or PRGO 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.
04), +348. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (MCK: +348. 1%, TLPH: -98. 6%), 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 TLPH and INVA and PRGO 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: TLPH is a small-cap quality compounder stock; INVA is a small-cap high-growth stock; PRGO is a small-cap income-oriented stock; MCK is a mid-cap high-growth stock. PRGO pays a dividend while TLPH, INVA, 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.