Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
XFOR vs CYCN vs IMVT vs RARE vs ACAD
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
XFOR vs CYCN vs IMVT vs RARE vs ACAD — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology |
| Market Cap | $505M | $14M | $6.90B | $2.39B | $3.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $9M | $2M | $0.00 | $669M | $1.10B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-100M | $-5M | $-506M | $-609M | $376M |
| Gross Margin | 79.4% | 100.0% | — | 83.6% | 91.5% |
| Operating Margin | -10.8% | -337.4% | — | -83.9% | 7.4% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | — | 54.2x |
| Total Debt | $77M | $0.00 | $72K | $1.28B | $52M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $217M | $3M | $902M | $434M | $178M |
XFOR vs CYCN vs IMVT vs RARE vs ACAD — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| X4 Pharmaceuticals,… (XFOR) | 100 | 1.4 | -98.6% |
| Cyclerion Therapeut… (CYCN) | 100 | 2.7 | -97.3% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 138.1 | +38.1% |
| Ultragenyx Pharmace… (RARE) | 100 | 31.1 | -68.9% |
| ACADIA Pharmaceutic… (ACAD) | 100 | 43.5 | -56.5% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: XFOR vs CYCN vs IMVT vs RARE vs ACAD
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
XFOR is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if growth exposure is your priority.
- Rev growth 12.7%, EPS growth 66.5%
- 12.7% revenue growth vs IMVT's -22.2%
CYCN lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
IMVT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for long-term compounding.
- 237.9% 10Y total return vs ACAD's -44.6%
- +110.9% vs RARE's -38.0%
Among these 5 stocks, RARE doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ACAD carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- beta 1.10
- Lower volatility, beta 1.10, Low D/E 4.3%, current ratio 3.83x
- Beta 1.10, current ratio 3.83x
- 34.3% margin vs XFOR's -11.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 12.7% revenue growth vs IMVT's -22.2% | |
| Quality / Margins | 34.3% margin vs XFOR's -11.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.10 vs XFOR's 2.35, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | Tie | None of these 5 stocks pay a meaningful dividend |
| Momentum (1Y) | +110.9% vs RARE's -38.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 26.2% ROA vs IMVT's -62.2% |
XFOR vs CYCN vs IMVT vs RARE vs ACAD — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
XFOR vs CYCN vs IMVT vs RARE vs ACAD — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ACAD leads in 2 of 6 categories
IMVT leads 1 • XFOR leads 0 • CYCN leads 0 • RARE leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ACAD leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ACAD and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $1.1B and $0 in trailing revenue. ACAD is the more profitable business, keeping 34.3% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to XFOR's -11.1%. On growth, ACAD holds the edge at +9.7% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $9M | $2M | $0 | $669M | $1.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$97M | -$7M | -$532M | -$536M | $96M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$100M | -$5M | -$506M | -$609M | $376M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$73M | -$4M | -$407M | -$487M | $212M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +79.4% | +100.0% | — | +83.6% | +91.5% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -10.8% | -3.4% | — | -83.9% | +7.4% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -11.1% | -2.6% | — | -91.0% | +34.3% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -8.1% | -180.0% | — | -72.8% | +19.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -90.6% | -100.0% | — | -2.4% | +9.7% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -5.0% | -35.7% | -14.1% | -17.2% | -81.8% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — XFOR and IMVT and ACAD each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $505M | $14M | $6.9B | $2.4B | $3.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $365M | $11M | $6.0B | $3.2B | $3.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.14x | -2.98x | -12.14x | -4.18x | 9.21x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | 54.20x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | 25.09x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 14.39x | 6.79x | — | 3.56x | 3.37x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.91x | 1.15x | 7.19x | — | 2.94x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | 34.34x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ACAD leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ACAD delivers a 35.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $36 in annual profit, vs $-6 for RARE. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to XFOR's 0.41x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ACAD scores 6/9 vs CYCN's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -94.9% | -62.1% | -68.2% | -6.1% | +35.6% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -48.1% | -55.1% | -62.2% | -45.8% | +26.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -143.1% | -65.1% | — | -89.4% | +10.0% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -45.9% | -55.5% | -68.3% | -46.4% | +10.1% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.41x | — | 0.00x | — | 0.04x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$140M | -$3M | -$902M | $842M | -$126M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $217M | $3M | $902M | $434M | $178M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $77M | $0 | $72,000 | $1.3B | $52M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -11.10x | — | — | -14.49x | — |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
IMVT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IMVT five years ago would be worth $31,304 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $159 for XFOR. Over the past 12 months, IMVT leads with a +110.9% total return vs RARE's -38.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IMVT at 15.7% vs XFOR's -61.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +2.8% | +142.5% | +29.8% | +3.2% | -19.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +31.1% | +4.8% | +110.9% | -38.0% | -3.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -94.1% | -25.3% | +55.0% | -52.6% | -14.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.4% | -96.2% | +213.0% | -76.3% | -22.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.8% | -98.7% | +237.9% | -59.4% | -44.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -61.1% | -9.3% | +15.7% | -22.0% | -5.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — IMVT and ACAD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ACAD is the less volatile stock with a 1.10 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than XFOR's 2.35 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. IMVT currently trades 92.7% from its 52-week high vs CYCN's 38.3% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.35x | 1.12x | 1.66x | 1.43x | 1.10x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.83 | $8.48 | $36.27 | $42.37 | $27.81 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.35 | $1.03 | $14.32 | $18.29 | $19.69 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +82.8% | +38.3% | +92.7% | +57.5% | +75.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.5 | 57.1 | 57.9 | 53.2 | 47.9 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 390K | 232K | 1.9M | 1.5M | 1.4M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: XFOR as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", RARE as "Buy", ACAD as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 200.0% upside for XFOR (target: $12) vs 29.9% for IMVT (target: $44).
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | — | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $12.00 | — | $43.67 | $48.36 | $34.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 13 | — | 23 | 33 | 37 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 1 | — |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +0.9% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
ACAD leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). IMVT leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
XFOR vs CYCN vs IMVT vs RARE vs ACAD: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is XFOR or CYCN or IMVT or RARE or ACAD a better buy right now?
For growth investors, X4 Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(XFOR) is the stronger pick with 1273% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 7% for Cyclerion Therapeutics, Inc. (CYCN). ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. (ACAD) offers the better valuation at 9. 2x trailing P/E (54. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate X4 Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (XFOR) a "Buy" — based on 13 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 — XFOR or CYCN or IMVT or RARE or ACAD?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +213. 0%, compared to -98. 4% for X4 Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (XFOR). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +237. 9% versus XFOR's -99. 8%. 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 — XFOR or CYCN or IMVT or RARE or ACAD?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(ACAD) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 10β versus X4 Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 2. 35β — meaning XFOR is approximately 113% more volatile than ACAD relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 41% for X4 Pharmaceuticals, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — XFOR or CYCN or IMVT or RARE or ACAD?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), X4 Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(XFOR) is pulling ahead at 1273% versus 3. 7% for Cyclerion Therapeutics, Inc. (CYCN). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. grew EPS 68. 4% year-over-year, compared to -1. 5% for Immunovant, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CYCN leads at 91. 1% 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 — XFOR or CYCN or IMVT or RARE or ACAD?
ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(ACAD) is the more profitable company, earning 36. 5% net margin versus -225. 6% for X4 Pharmaceuticals, Inc. — meaning it keeps 36. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ACAD leads at 9. 8% versus -247. 4% for XFOR. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CYCN 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.
06Is XFOR or CYCN or IMVT or RARE or ACAD more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for XFOR: 200.
0% to $12. 00.
07Which pays a better dividend — XFOR or CYCN or IMVT or RARE or ACAD?
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.
08Is XFOR or CYCN or IMVT or RARE or ACAD better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(ACAD) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1. 10)). X4 Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (XFOR) carries a higher beta of 2. 35 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ACAD: -44. 6%, XFOR: -99. 8%), 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.
09What are the main differences between XFOR and CYCN and IMVT and RARE and ACAD?
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: XFOR is a small-cap high-growth stock; CYCN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; RARE is a small-cap high-growth stock; ACAD is a small-cap deep-value 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.