Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
ANL vs IMVT vs RCUS vs ABBV vs CRL vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Medical - Diagnostics & Research
Banks - Diversified
ANL vs IMVT vs RCUS vs ABBV vs CRL vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Medical - Diagnostics & Research | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $322M | $6.90B | $2.40B | $402.80B | $9.03B | $896.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6M | $0.00 | $236M | $61.16B | $4.03B | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-54M | $-506M | $-369M | $4.23B | $-185M | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 100.0% | — | 90.7% | 70.2% | 31.9% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | -10.0% | — | -168.6% | 26.7% | 11.8% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 16.0x | 16.9x | 14.4x |
| Total Debt | $27M | $72K | $99M | $69.07B | $3.07B | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $61M | $902M | $222M | $5.23B | $214M | $343.34B |
ANL vs IMVT vs RCUS vs ABBV vs CRL vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 23 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adlai Nortye Ltd. (ANL) | 100 | 68.8 | -31.2% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 87.6 | -12.4% |
| Arcus Biosciences, … (RCUS) | 100 | 132.6 | +32.6% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 152.8 | +52.8% |
| Charles River Labor… (CRL) | 100 | 95.7 | -4.3% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 221.2 | +121.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: ANL vs IMVT vs RCUS vs ABBV vs CRL vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
ANL ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +5.5% vs JPM's +21.8%
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.66, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 9.09x
Among these 6 stocks, RCUS doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
ABBV carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 43 yrs, beta 0.14, yield 2.9%
- Rev growth 8.6%, EPS growth -0.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 1.8%
- Beta 0.14, yield 2.9%, current ratio 0.67x
- 8.6% revenue growth vs ANL's -100.0%
CRL doesn't hold a clear category lead here; it's more of a secondary option in this specific comparison.
JPM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs ABBV's 362.2%
- Lower P/E (14.4x vs 16.9x)
- 20.4% margin vs ANL's -8.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.6% revenue growth vs ANL's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.4x vs 16.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.4% margin vs ANL's -8.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.14 vs RCUS's 2.00 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, 43-year raise streak, vs JPM's 1.9%, (4 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +5.5% vs JPM's +21.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 3.1% ROA vs IMVT's -62.2% |
ANL vs IMVT vs RCUS vs ABBV vs CRL vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
Segment breakdown not available.
ANL vs IMVT vs RCUS vs ABBV vs CRL vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 6 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ABBV leads in 3 of 6 categories
JPM leads 1 • ANL leads 0 • IMVT leads 0 • RCUS leads 0 • CRL leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABBV leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM and IMVT operate at a comparable scale, with $280.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 20.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ANL's -8.3%. On growth, ABBV holds the edge at +10.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $6M | $0 | $236M | $61.2B | $4.0B | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$64M | -$532M | -$391M | $24.5B | $824M | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$54M | -$506M | -$369M | $4.2B | -$185M | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$67M | -$407M | -$489M | $18.7B | $391M | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +100.0% | — | +90.7% | +70.2% | +31.9% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -10.0% | — | -168.6% | +26.7% | +11.8% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -8.3% | — | -156.4% | +6.9% | -4.6% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -10.3% | — | -2.1% | +30.6% | +9.7% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | -39.3% | +10.0% | +1.2% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +78.7% | -14.1% | +10.5% | +57.4% | -160.0% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CRL and JPM each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.0x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 83% valuation discount to ABBV's 96.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, CRL's 13.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than JPM's 18.4x.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $322M | $6.9B | $2.4B | $402.8B | $9.0B | $896.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $289M | $6.0B | $2.3B | $466.6B | $11.9B | $1.50T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.11x | -12.14x | -7.23x | 96.09x | -64.44x | 16.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 15.96x | 16.90x | 14.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | 16.53x | 13.04x | 18.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | — | 9.70x | 6.59x | 2.25x | 3.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.31x | 7.19x | 4.05x | — | 2.89x | 2.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 22.61x | 17.42x | 8.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
ABBV leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
ABBV delivers a 62.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $62 in annual profit, vs $-101 for ANL. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ABBV scores 6/9 vs RCUS's 0/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -101.3% | -68.2% | -69.0% | +62.1% | -5.7% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -50.2% | -62.2% | -35.3% | +3.1% | -2.5% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -7.3% | — | -64.1% | +23.9% | +6.3% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -103.8% | -68.3% | -42.1% | +21.5% | +8.1% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.07x | 0.00x | 0.16x | — | 0.95x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$34M | -$902M | -$123M | $63.8B | $2.9B | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $61M | $902M | $222M | $5.2B | $214M | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $27M | $72,000 | $99M | $69.1B | $3.1B | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -28.22x | — | -13.38x | 3.28x | 4.29x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
JPM leads this category, winning 3 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 $5,277 for CRL. Over the past 12 months, ANL leads with a +545.0% total return vs JPM's +21.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs ANL's -11.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +647.8% | +29.8% | +2.2% | +0.8% | -7.4% | -0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +545.0% | +110.9% | +154.5% | +21.9% | +23.5% | +21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -31.2% | +55.0% | +18.3% | +79.3% | -8.7% | +138.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -31.2% | +213.0% | -3.1% | +123.7% | -47.2% | +118.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -31.2% | +237.9% | +40.0% | +362.2% | +122.4% | +465.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -11.7% | +15.7% | +5.8% | +21.5% | -3.0% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — ABBV and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
ABBV is the less volatile stock with a 0.14 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RCUS's 2.00 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JPM currently trades 95.1% from its 52-week high vs ANL's 59.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.39x | 1.66x | 2.00x | 0.14x | 1.39x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $17.25 | $36.27 | $28.72 | $244.81 | $228.88 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.88 | $14.32 | $7.91 | $181.73 | $143.06 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +59.8% | +92.7% | +82.9% | +93.0% | +81.9% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 39.0 | 57.9 | 46.5 | 62.8 | 60.8 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 380K | 1.9M | 1.1M | 4.6M | 767K | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
ABBV leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: ANL as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", RCUS as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", CRL as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 151.9% upside for ANL (target: $26) vs 5.9% for JPM (target: $340). For income investors, ABBV offers the higher dividend yield at 2.89% vs JPM's 1.86%.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $26.00 | $43.67 | $31.00 | $256.92 | $213.17 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 23 | 18 | 41 | 37 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | +2.9% | — | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 43 | 1 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | $6.57 | — | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +4.0% | +3.9% |
ABBV leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). JPM leads in 1 (Total Returns). 2 tied.
ANL vs IMVT vs RCUS vs ABBV vs CRL vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is ANL or IMVT or RCUS or ABBV or CRL or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the stronger pick with 8. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Adlai Nortye Ltd. (ANL). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 0x trailing P/E (14. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Adlai Nortye Ltd. (ANL) a "Buy" — based on 1 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 — ANL or IMVT or RCUS or ABBV or CRL or JPM?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 0x versus AbbVie Inc. at 96. 1x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 4x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — ANL or IMVT or RCUS or ABBV or CRL or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +213. 0%, compared to -47. 2% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. (CRL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus ANL's -31. 2%. 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 — ANL or IMVT or RCUS or ABBV or CRL or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 14β versus Arcus Biosciences, Inc. 's 2. 00β — meaning RCUS is approximately 1368% more volatile than ABBV relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 0% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — ANL or IMVT or RCUS or ABBV or CRL or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is pulling ahead at 8. 6% versus -100. 0% for Adlai Nortye Ltd. (ANL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Adlai Nortye Ltd. grew EPS 68. 3% year-over-year, compared to -1555. 0% for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, RCUS leads at 30. 2% 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 — ANL or IMVT or RCUS or ABBV or CRL or JPM?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 4% net margin versus -833. 1% for Adlai Nortye Ltd. — meaning it keeps 20. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ABBV leads at 32. 8% versus -996. 4% for ANL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ANL 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.
07Is ANL or IMVT or RCUS or ABBV or CRL or JPM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) trades at 14. 4x forward P/E versus 16. 9x for Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. — 2. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ANL: 151. 9% to $26. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — ANL or IMVT or RCUS or ABBV or CRL or JPM?
In this comparison, ABBV (2.
9% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield) pay a dividend. ANL, IMVT, RCUS, CRL do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is ANL or IMVT or RCUS or ABBV or CRL or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 14), 2. 9% yield, +362. 2% 10Y return). Arcus Biosciences, Inc. (RCUS) carries a higher beta of 2. 00 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (ABBV: +362. 2%, RCUS: +40. 0%), 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 ANL and IMVT and RCUS and ABBV and CRL and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (ANL (Healthcare) and IMVT (Healthcare) and RCUS (Healthcare) and ABBV (Healthcare) and CRL (Healthcare) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: ANL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; RCUS is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ABBV is a large-cap quality compounder stock; CRL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. ABBV, JPM pay a dividend while ANL, IMVT, RCUS, 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.