Compare Stocks

5 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

XOMAP vs RCUS vs FOLD vs IMVT vs CRL

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
XOMAP
XOMA Corporation

Biotechnology

HealthcareNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$306M
5Y Perf.+1.5%
RCUS
Arcus Biosciences, Inc.

Biotechnology

HealthcareNYSE • US
Market Cap$2.55B
5Y Perf.-2.3%
FOLD
Amicus Therapeutics, Inc.

Biotechnology

HealthcareNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$4.55B
5Y Perf.-37.4%
IMVT
Immunovant, Inc.

Biotechnology

HealthcareNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$5.88B
5Y Perf.-37.3%
CRL
Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.

Medical - Diagnostics & Research

HealthcareNYSE • US
Market Cap$8.76B
5Y Perf.-28.9%

XOMAP vs RCUS vs FOLD vs IMVT vs CRL — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
XOMAP logoXOMAP
RCUS logoRCUS
FOLD logoFOLD
IMVT logoIMVT
CRL logoCRL
IndustryBiotechnologyBiotechnologyBiotechnologyBiotechnologyMedical - Diagnostics & Research
Market Cap$306M$2.55B$4.55B$5.88B$8.76B
Revenue (TTM)$52M$236M$634M$0.00$4.03B
Net Income (TTM)$32M$-369M$-27M$-464M$-185M
Gross Margin94.3%90.7%87.9%31.9%
Operating Margin21.8%-168.6%5.2%11.8%
Forward P/E32.3x40.6x16.0x
Total Debt$132M$99M$483M$98K$3.07B
Cash & Equiv.$83M$222M$214M$714M$214M

XOMAP vs RCUS vs FOLD vs IMVT vs CRLLong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

XOMAP
RCUS
FOLD
IMVT
CRL
StockDec 20May 26Return
XOMA Corporation (XOMAP)100101.5+1.5%
Arcus Biosciences, … (RCUS)10097.7-2.3%
Amicus Therapeutics… (FOLD)10062.6-37.4%
Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT)10062.7-37.3%
Charles River Labor… (CRL)10071.1-28.9%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: XOMAP vs RCUS vs FOLD vs IMVT vs CRL

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: XOMAP leads in 5 of 7 categories (5-stock set), making it the strongest pick for growth and revenue expansion and profitability and margin quality. Arcus Biosciences, Inc. is the stronger pick specifically for recent price momentum and sentiment. CRL also leads in specific categories worth noting. As sector peers, any of these can serve as alternatives in the same allocation.
XOMAP
XOMA Corporation
The Income Pick

XOMAP carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.

  • Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 0.03, yield 1.2%
  • Rev growth 83.1%, EPS growth 188.5%, 3Y rev CAGR 105.3%
  • Beta 0.03, yield 1.2%, current ratio 3.37x
  • 83.1% revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3%
Best for: income & stability and growth exposure
RCUS
Arcus Biosciences, Inc.
The Momentum Pick

RCUS is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if momentum is your priority.

  • +197.3% vs XOMAP's +7.3%
Best for: momentum
FOLD
Amicus Therapeutics, Inc.
The Lower-Volatility Pick

FOLD lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.

Best for: healthcare exposure
IMVT
Immunovant, Inc.
The Long-Run Compounder

IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.

  • 190.9% 10Y total return vs FOLD's 119.2%
  • Lower volatility, beta 1.36, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 11.16x
Best for: long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night
CRL
Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.
The Value Play

CRL ranks third and is worth considering specifically for value.

  • Better valuation composite
Best for: value
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthXOMAP logoXOMAP83.1% revenue growth vs IMVT's -21.3%
ValueCRL logoCRLBetter valuation composite
Quality / MarginsXOMAP logoXOMAP60.8% margin vs RCUS's -156.4%
Stability / SafetyXOMAP logoXOMAPBeta 0.03 vs RCUS's 1.84
DividendsXOMAP logoXOMAP1.2% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
Momentum (1Y)RCUS logoRCUS+197.3% vs XOMAP's +7.3%
Efficiency (ROA)XOMAP logoXOMAP13.0% ROA vs IMVT's -44.1%

XOMAP vs RCUS vs FOLD vs IMVT vs CRL — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

XOMAPXOMA Corporation

Segment breakdown not available.

RCUSArcus Biosciences, Inc.
FY 2025
License And Development Services
87.4%$221M
Development Services
6.7%$17M
R&D Services
3.2%$8M
License
2.8%$7M
FOLDAmicus Therapeutics, Inc.

Segment breakdown not available.

IMVTImmunovant, Inc.

Segment breakdown not available.

CRLCharles River Laboratories International, Inc.
FY 2025
Discovery and Safety Assessment
59.8%$2.4B
Research Models and Services
21.1%$846M
Manufacturing Support
19.1%$766M

XOMAP vs RCUS vs FOLD vs IMVT vs CRL — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLXOMAPLAGGINGFOLD

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

XOMAP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

CRL and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $4.0B and $0 in trailing revenue. XOMAP is the more profitable business, keeping 60.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to RCUS's -156.4%. On growth, XOMAP holds the edge at +57.9% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.

MetricXOMAP logoXOMAPXOMA CorporationRCUS logoRCUSArcus Biosciences…FOLD logoFOLDAmicus Therapeuti…IMVT logoIMVTImmunovant, Inc.CRL logoCRLCharles River Lab…
RevenueTrailing 12 months$52M$236M$634M$0$4.0B
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax$14M-$391M$40M-$487M$824M
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit$32M-$369M-$27M-$464M-$185M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex$3M-$489M$30M-$423M$391M
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+94.3%+90.7%+87.9%+31.9%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue+21.8%-168.6%+5.2%+11.8%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue+60.8%-156.4%-4.3%-4.6%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue+5.4%-2.1%+4.7%+9.7%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+57.9%-39.3%+23.7%+1.2%
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year-68.3%+10.5%-89.0%+19.7%-160.0%
XOMAP leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

CRL leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

On an enterprise value basis, CRL's 12.7x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than FOLD's 114.9x.

MetricXOMAP logoXOMAPXOMA CorporationRCUS logoRCUSArcus Biosciences…FOLD logoFOLDAmicus Therapeuti…IMVT logoIMVTImmunovant, Inc.CRL logoCRLCharles River Lab…
Market CapShares × price$306M$2.6B$4.5B$5.9B$8.8B
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash$355M$2.4B$4.8B$5.2B$11.6B
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS17.37x-7.71x-164.85x-10.60x-61.04x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.32.31x40.62x16.00x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate1.30x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple24.73x114.88x12.75x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue5.88x10.34x7.17x2.18x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share4.39x4.32x16.29x6.20x2.74x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF106.73x152.43x16.90x
CRL leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

XOMAP leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

XOMAP delivers a 32.6% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $33 in annual profit, vs $-69 for RCUS. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FOLD's 1.76x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), XOMAP scores 5/9 vs RCUS's 0/9, reflecting solid financial health.

MetricXOMAP logoXOMAPXOMA CorporationRCUS logoRCUSArcus Biosciences…FOLD logoFOLDAmicus Therapeuti…IMVT logoIMVTImmunovant, Inc.CRL logoCRLCharles River Lab…
ROE (TTM)Return on equity+32.6%-69.0%-12.0%-47.1%-5.7%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets+13.0%-35.3%-3.2%-44.1%-2.5%
ROICReturn on invested capital+6.8%-64.1%+5.3%+6.3%
ROCEReturn on capital employed+5.2%-42.1%+5.1%-66.1%+8.1%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–950424
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage1.27x0.16x1.76x0.00x0.95x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash$49M-$123M$269M-$714M$2.9B
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$83M$222M$214M$714M$214M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$132M$99M$483M$98,000$3.1B
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense1.47x-13.38x1.00x4.29x
XOMAP leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

IMVT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in IMVT five years ago would be worth $18,445 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $5,336 for CRL. Over the past 12 months, RCUS leads with a +197.3% total return vs XOMAP's +7.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IMVT at 14.4% vs CRL's -2.2% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricXOMAP logoXOMAPXOMA CorporationRCUS logoRCUSArcus Biosciences…FOLD logoFOLDAmicus Therapeuti…IMVT logoIMVTImmunovant, Inc.CRL logoCRLCharles River Lab…
YTD ReturnYear-to-date-2.5%+8.9%+1.5%+11.7%-12.3%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months+7.3%+197.3%+138.3%+102.4%+25.7%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+31.4%+27.8%+19.0%+49.8%-6.5%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+43.0%-12.1%+54.3%+84.4%-46.6%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends+51.0%+49.2%+119.2%+190.9%+114.0%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return+9.5%+8.5%+6.0%+14.4%-2.2%
IMVT leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — XOMAP and FOLD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

XOMAP is the less volatile stock with a 0.03 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RCUS's 1.84 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. FOLD currently trades 99.9% from its 52-week high vs CRL's 77.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricXOMAP logoXOMAPXOMA CorporationRCUS logoRCUSArcus Biosciences…FOLD logoFOLDAmicus Therapeuti…IMVT logoIMVTImmunovant, Inc.CRL logoCRLCharles River Lab…
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5000.03x1.84x0.61x1.36x1.44x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$30.00$28.72$14.50$30.09$228.88
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$25.14$7.72$5.51$13.36$132.58
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+84.6%+88.3%+99.9%+96.2%+77.6%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10041.752.972.250.657.4
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded2K1.2M2.9M1.4M792K
Evenly matched — XOMAP and FOLD each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

CRL leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.

Analyst consensus: XOMAP as "Buy", RCUS as "Buy", FOLD as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", CRL as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 57.2% upside for IMVT (target: $46) vs 0.1% for FOLD (target: $15). XOMAP is the only dividend payer here at 1.20% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.

MetricXOMAP logoXOMAPXOMA CorporationRCUS logoRCUSArcus Biosciences…FOLD logoFOLDAmicus Therapeuti…IMVT logoIMVTImmunovant, Inc.CRL logoCRLCharles River Lab…
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellBuyBuyBuyBuyBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$30.00$14.50$45.50$206.43
# AnalystsCovering analysts918242336
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+1.2%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises01
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$0.30
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap+5.2%0.0%0.0%0.0%+4.1%
CRL leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Key Takeaway

XOMAP leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). CRL leads in 2 (Valuation Metrics, Analyst Outlook). 1 tied.

Best OverallXOMA Corporation (XOMAP)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

XOMAP vs RCUS vs FOLD vs IMVT vs CRL: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is XOMAP or RCUS or FOLD or IMVT or CRL a better buy right now?

For growth investors, XOMA Corporation (XOMAP) is the stronger pick with 83.

1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -4. 3% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS). XOMA Corporation (XOMAP) offers the better valuation at 17. 4x trailing P/E (32. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate XOMA Corporation (XOMAP) a "Buy" — based on 9 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.

02

Which has the better valuation — XOMAP or RCUS or FOLD or IMVT or CRL?

On forward P/E, Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.

is actually cheaper at 16. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — XOMAP or RCUS or FOLD or IMVT or CRL?

Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.

(IMVT) delivered a total return of +84. 4%, compared to -46. 6% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +190. 9% versus RCUS's +49. 2%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — XOMAP or RCUS or FOLD or IMVT or CRL?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), XOMA Corporation (XOMAP) is the lower-risk stock at 0.

03β versus Arcus Biosciences, Inc. 's 1. 84β — meaning RCUS is approximately 5498% more volatile than XOMAP relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 176% for Amicus Therapeutics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — XOMAP or RCUS or FOLD or IMVT or CRL?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), XOMA Corporation (XOMAP) is pulling ahead at 83.

1% versus -4. 3% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: XOMA Corporation grew EPS 188. 5% year-over-year, compared to -1555. 0% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, XOMAP leads at 105. 3% 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.

06

Which has better profit margins — XOMAP or RCUS or FOLD or IMVT or CRL?

XOMA Corporation (XOMAP) is the more profitable company, earning 60.

8% net margin versus -142. 9% for Arcus Biosciences, Inc. — meaning it keeps 60. 8% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: XOMAP leads at 21. 8% versus -156. 3% for RCUS. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RCUS leads at 96. 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.

07

Is XOMAP or RCUS or FOLD or IMVT or CRL more undervalued right now?

On forward earnings alone, Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.

(CRL) trades at 16. 0x forward P/E versus 40. 6x for Amicus Therapeutics, Inc. — 24. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for IMVT: 57. 2% to $45. 50.

08

Which pays a better dividend — XOMAP or RCUS or FOLD or IMVT or CRL?

In this comparison, XOMAP (1.

2% yield) pays a dividend. RCUS, FOLD, IMVT, CRL do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

09

Is XOMAP or RCUS or FOLD or IMVT or CRL better for a retirement portfolio?

For long-horizon retirement investors, XOMA Corporation (XOMAP) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0.

03), 1. 2% yield). Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) carries a higher beta of 1. 84 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (XOMAP: +51. 0%, RCUS: +49. 2%), 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.

10

What are the main differences between XOMAP and RCUS and FOLD and IMVT 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: XOMAP is a small-cap high-growth stock; RCUS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FOLD is a small-cap high-growth stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CRL is a small-cap quality compounder stock. XOMAP pays a dividend while RCUS, FOLD, IMVT, CRL 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.

Stocks Like

XOMAP

High-Growth Quality Leader

  • Sector: Healthcare
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 28%
  • Net Margin > 36%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

RCUS

Quality Business

  • Sector: Healthcare
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Gross Margin > 54%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

FOLD

High-Growth Disruptor

  • Sector: Healthcare
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 11%
  • Gross Margin > 52%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

IMVT

Quality Business

  • Sector: Healthcare
  • Market Cap > $100B
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

CRL

Quality Business

  • Sector: Healthcare
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Gross Margin > 19%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform XOMAP and RCUS and FOLD and IMVT and CRL on the metrics below

Revenue Growth>
%
(XOMAP: 57.9% · RCUS: -39.3%)

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.