Biotechnology
Compare Stocks
4 / 10Stock Comparison
TNGX vs PRAX vs ILMN vs CRL
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
TNGX vs PRAX vs ILMN vs CRL — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Medical - Diagnostics & Research |
| Market Cap | $3.19B | $9.63B | $21.07B | $8.98B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $62M | $-92K | $4.39B | $4.03B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-102M | $-327M | $853M | $-185M |
| Gross Margin | 97.3% | — | 67.1% | 24.9% |
| Operating Margin | -178.4% | — | 20.9% | 11.8% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 26.8x | 16.4x |
| Total Debt | $34M | $110K | $2.55B | $3.07B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $112M | $357M | $1.42B | $214M |
TNGX vs PRAX vs ILMN vs CRL — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tango Therapeutics,… (TNGX) | 100 | 236.0 | +136.0% |
| Praxis Precision Me… (PRAX) | 100 | 63.5 | -36.5% |
| Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) | 100 | 48.8 | -51.2% |
| Charles River Labor… (CRL) | 100 | 79.9 | -20.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: TNGX vs PRAX vs ILMN vs CRL
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
TNGX is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Rev growth 48.3%, EPS growth 26.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 35.9%
- 129.5% 10Y total return vs CRL's 119.2%
- 48.3% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0%
- +19.4% vs CRL's +32.8%
PRAX lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
ILMN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 1.23
- Lower volatility, beta 1.23, Low D/E 93.8%, current ratio 2.08x
- Beta 1.23, current ratio 2.08x
- 19.4% margin vs TNGX's -162.9%
CRL is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (16.4x vs 26.8x)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 48.3% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (16.4x vs 26.8x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 19.4% margin vs TNGX's -162.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.23 vs TNGX's 1.81 | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 4 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +19.4% vs CRL's +32.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.4% ROA vs PRAX's -40.2%, ROIC 16.8% vs -65.0% |
TNGX vs PRAX vs ILMN vs CRL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
TNGX vs PRAX vs ILMN vs CRL — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 4 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ILMN leads in 2 of 6 categories
CRL leads 1 • TNGX leads 1 • PRAX leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ILMN leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ILMN and PRAX operate at a comparable scale, with $4.4B and -$92,000 in trailing revenue. ILMN is the more profitable business, keeping 19.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to TNGX's -162.9%. On growth, ILMN holds the edge at +4.8% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $62M | -$92,000 | $4.4B | $4.0B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$109M | -$357M | $1.1B | $757M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$102M | -$327M | $853M | -$185M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$140M | -$283M | $989M | $391M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +97.3% | — | +67.1% | +24.9% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -178.4% | — | +20.9% | +11.8% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -162.9% | — | +19.4% | -4.6% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -2.2% | — | +22.5% | +9.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -100.0% | — | +4.8% | +1.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +11.8% | +2.7% | +6.1% | -160.0% |
Valuation Metrics
CRL leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, CRL's 13.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ILMN's 19.6x.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $3.2B | $9.6B | $21.1B | $9.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $3.1B | $9.3B | $22.2B | $11.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -26.99x | -24.72x | 25.45x | -62.52x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 26.77x | 16.42x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 6.01x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 19.58x | 12.98x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 51.17x | — | 4.86x | 2.24x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 7.88x | 8.54x | 7.95x | 2.81x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 22.63x | 17.31x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ILMN leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ILMN delivers a 32.8% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $33 in annual profit, vs $-50 for TNGX. PRAX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CRL's 0.95x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ILMN scores 8/9 vs PRAX's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -50.3% | -43.0% | +32.8% | -5.7% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -36.3% | -40.2% | +13.4% | -2.5% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -38.5% | -65.0% | +16.8% | +6.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -34.0% | -49.3% | +17.6% | +8.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.10x | 0.00x | 0.94x | 0.95x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$79M | -$357M | $1.1B | $2.9B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $112M | $357M | $1.4B | $214M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $34M | $110,000 | $2.6B | $3.1B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | 12.09x | 6.38x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
TNGX leads this category, winning 4 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 $3,717 for ILMN. Over the past 12 months, TNGX leads with a +1941.7% total return vs CRL's +32.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PRAX at 174.9% vs ILMN's -10.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +162.9% | +16.4% | +3.2% | -10.1% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +1941.7% | +775.0% | +81.7% | +32.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +582.6% | +1976.5% | -27.1% | -4.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +117.2% | -20.8% | -62.8% | -46.9% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +129.5% | -20.1% | +0.7% | +119.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +89.7% | +174.9% | -10.0% | -1.4% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — PRAX and ILMN each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ILMN is the less volatile stock with a 1.23 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. PRAX currently trades 93.6% from its 52-week high vs CRL's 79.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.81x | 1.55x | 1.23x | 1.52x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $28.41 | $356.00 | $155.53 | $228.88 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.03 | $35.18 | $73.86 | $131.30 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +82.6% | +93.6% | +89.2% | +79.5% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.4 | 55.6 | 65.2 | 57.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 3.4M | 378K | 1.5M | 806K |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: TNGX as "Buy", PRAX as "Buy", ILMN as "Buy", CRL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 63.3% upside for PRAX (target: $544) vs -3.1% for TNGX (target: $23).
| Metric | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $22.75 | $544.40 | $147.38 | $205.43 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 10 | 16 | 50 | 36 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.5% | +4.0% |
ILMN leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CRL leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
TNGX vs PRAX vs ILMN vs CRL: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is TNGX or PRAX or ILMN or CRL 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 -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). Illumina, Inc. (ILMN) offers the better valuation at 25. 5x trailing P/E (26. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Tango Therapeutics, Inc. (TNGX) 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 — TNGX or PRAX or ILMN or CRL?
On forward P/E, Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.
is actually cheaper at 16. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — TNGX or PRAX or ILMN or CRL?
Over the past 5 years, Tango Therapeutics, Inc.
(TNGX) delivered a total return of +117. 2%, compared to -62. 8% for Illumina, Inc. (ILMN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: TNGX returned +129. 5% versus PRAX's -20. 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 — TNGX or PRAX or ILMN or CRL?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Illumina, Inc.
(ILMN) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 23β versus Tango Therapeutics, Inc. 's 1. 81β — meaning TNGX is approximately 46% more volatile than ILMN relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 95% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — TNGX or PRAX or ILMN or CRL?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Tango Therapeutics, Inc.
(TNGX) is pulling ahead at 48. 3% versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Illumina, Inc. grew EPS 170. 9% year-over-year, compared to -1555. 0% for Charles River Laboratories International, 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.
06Which has better profit margins — TNGX or PRAX or ILMN or CRL?
Illumina, Inc.
(ILMN) is the more profitable company, earning 19. 6% net margin versus -162. 9% for Tango Therapeutics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 19. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ILMN leads at 19. 9% versus -178. 4% for TNGX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — TNGX leads at 96. 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 TNGX or PRAX or ILMN or CRL more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.
(CRL) trades at 16. 4x forward P/E versus 26. 8x for Illumina, Inc. — 10. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PRAX: 63. 3% to $544. 40.
08Which pays a better dividend — TNGX or PRAX or ILMN or CRL?
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.
09Is TNGX or PRAX or ILMN or CRL better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Illumina, Inc.
(ILMN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 23)). 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 (ILMN: +0. 7%, 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.
10What are the main differences between TNGX and PRAX and ILMN and CRL?
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: TNGX is a small-cap high-growth stock; PRAX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ILMN is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CRL 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.