Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
AURA vs IMVT vs REGN vs OCUL vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Banks - Diversified
AURA vs IMVT vs REGN vs OCUL vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $412M | $6.90B | $63.60B | $1.96B | $896.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $14.92B | $52M | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-112M | $-506M | $4.42B | $-290M | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | — | — | 84.5% | 87.2% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | — | — | 24.3% | -5.8% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 13.2x | — | 14.4x |
| Total Debt | $17M | $72K | $2.71B | $80M | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $60M | $902M | $3.12B | $737M | $343.34B |
AURA vs IMVT vs REGN vs OCUL vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aura Biosciences, I… (AURA) | 100 | 43.3 | -56.7% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 418.2 | +318.2% |
| Regeneron Pharmaceu… (REGN) | 100 | 95.7 | -4.3% |
| Ocular Therapeutix,… (OCUL) | 100 | 134.6 | +34.6% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 188.8 | +88.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: AURA vs IMVT vs REGN vs OCUL vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
AURA lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
IMVT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +110.9% vs AURA's -3.9%
REGN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 1.0%, EPS growth 8.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.6%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.51, Low D/E 8.7%, current ratio 4.13x
- 29.6% margin vs OCUL's -5.6%
- Beta 0.51 vs AURA's 1.68, lower leverage
Among these 5 stocks, OCUL doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
JPM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.94, yield 1.9%
- 465.8% 10Y total return vs IMVT's 237.9%
- PEG 0.81 vs REGN's 2.08
- Beta 0.94, yield 1.9%, current ratio 0.52x
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 3.3% NII/revenue growth vs IMVT's -22.2% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 29.6% margin vs OCUL's -5.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.51 vs AURA's 1.68, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield, 15-year raise streak, vs REGN's 0.6%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +110.9% vs AURA's -3.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 11.1% ROA vs AURA's -64.1%, ROIC 8.9% vs -72.4% |
AURA vs IMVT vs REGN vs OCUL 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.
AURA vs IMVT vs REGN vs OCUL vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories
REGN leads 1 • AURA leads 0 • IMVT leads 0 • OCUL leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM 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. REGN is the more profitable business, keeping 29.6% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to OCUL's -5.6%. On growth, REGN holds the edge at +19.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $0 | $14.9B | $52M | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$117M | -$532M | $4.2B | -$295M | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$112M | -$506M | $4.4B | -$290M | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$92M | -$407M | $4.2B | -$241M | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | — | +84.5% | +87.2% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | — | +24.3% | -5.8% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | — | +29.6% | -5.6% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | — | +27.9% | -4.6% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +19.0% | +0.8% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.1% | -14.1% | -7.2% | -5.3% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — REGN and JPM each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 14.8x trailing earnings, REGN trades at a 8% valuation discount to JPM's 16.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 0.90x vs REGN's 2.33x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $412M | $6.9B | $63.6B | $2.0B | $896.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $369M | $6.0B | $63.2B | $1.3B | $1.50T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -3.64x | -12.14x | 14.76x | -6.30x | 16.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 13.18x | — | 14.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.33x | — | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 15.33x | — | 18.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | — | 4.43x | 37.77x | 3.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.82x | 7.19x | 2.13x | 2.56x | 2.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 15.59x | — | 8.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
REGN leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $-78 for AURA. 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), REGN scores 5/9 vs IMVT's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -78.1% | -68.2% | +14.3% | -64.6% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -64.1% | -62.2% | +11.1% | -48.4% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -72.4% | — | +8.9% | — | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -70.8% | -68.3% | +10.2% | -46.0% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.13x | 0.00x | 0.09x | 0.12x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$42M | -$902M | -$412M | -$657M | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $60M | $902M | $3.1B | $737M | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $17M | $72,000 | $2.7B | $80M | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | 108.44x | -24.63x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
Evenly matched — IMVT and JPM each lead in 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 $4,331 for AURA. Over the past 12 months, IMVT leads with a +110.9% total return vs AURA's -3.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors JPM at 33.6% vs AURA's -20.0% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +20.9% | +29.8% | -20.9% | -24.4% | -0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -3.9% | +110.9% | +18.0% | -0.1% | +21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -48.8% | +55.0% | -18.1% | +37.5% | +138.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -56.7% | +213.0% | +16.8% | -36.9% | +118.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -56.7% | +237.9% | +68.2% | +39.7% | +465.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -20.0% | +15.7% | -6.4% | +11.2% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — REGN and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
REGN is the less volatile stock with a 0.51 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AURA's 1.68 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 OCUL's 54.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.68x | 1.66x | 0.51x | 1.25x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $9.54 | $36.27 | $821.11 | $16.44 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $4.73 | $14.32 | $503.25 | $6.23 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +67.2% | +92.7% | +74.6% | +54.4% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 29.7 | 57.9 | 37.5 | 49.7 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 549K | 1.9M | 868K | 2.8M | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: AURA as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", REGN as "Buy", OCUL as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 235.6% upside for OCUL (target: $30) vs 5.9% for JPM (target: $340). For income investors, JPM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.86% vs REGN's 0.56%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $17.00 | $43.67 | $836.00 | $30.00 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 8 | 23 | 48 | 19 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +0.6% | — | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 1 | — | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $3.41 | — | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +6.2% | 0.0% | +3.9% |
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). REGN leads in 1 (Profitability & Efficiency). 3 tied.
AURA vs IMVT vs REGN vs OCUL vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is AURA or IMVT or REGN or OCUL or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger pick with 3. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -18. 7% for Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. (OCUL). Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (REGN) offers the better valuation at 14. 8x trailing P/E (13. 2x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Aura Biosciences, Inc. (AURA) a "Buy" — based on 8 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 — AURA or IMVT or REGN or OCUL or JPM?
On trailing P/E, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(REGN) is the cheapest at 14. 8x versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. at 16. 0x. On forward P/E, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is actually cheaper at 13. 2x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 0. 81x versus Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 2. 08x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — AURA or IMVT or REGN or OCUL or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +213. 0%, compared to -56. 7% for Aura Biosciences, Inc. (AURA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus AURA's -56. 7%. 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 — AURA or IMVT or REGN or OCUL or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(REGN) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 51β versus Aura Biosciences, Inc. 's 1. 68β — meaning AURA is approximately 232% more volatile than REGN 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 — AURA or IMVT or REGN or OCUL or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is pulling ahead at 3. 3% versus -18. 7% for Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. (OCUL). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. grew EPS 8. 2% year-over-year, compared to -16. 4% for Ocular Therapeutix, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, REGN leads at 5. 6% 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 — AURA or IMVT or REGN or OCUL or JPM?
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(REGN) is the more profitable company, earning 31. 4% net margin versus -513. 2% for Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. — meaning it keeps 31. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 26. 0% versus -521. 0% for OCUL. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — OCUL leads at 87. 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 AURA or IMVT or REGN or OCUL or JPM 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 81x versus Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 2. 08x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (REGN) trades at 13. 2x forward P/E versus 14. 4x for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — 1. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for OCUL: 235. 6% to $30. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — AURA or IMVT or REGN or OCUL or JPM?
In this comparison, JPM (1.
9% yield), REGN (0. 6% yield) pay a dividend. AURA, IMVT, OCUL do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is AURA or IMVT or REGN or OCUL or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
(REGN) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 51), 0. 6% yield). Aura Biosciences, Inc. (AURA) carries a higher beta of 1. 68 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (REGN: +68. 2%, AURA: -56. 7%), 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 AURA and IMVT and REGN and OCUL and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (AURA (Healthcare) and IMVT (Healthcare) and REGN (Healthcare) and OCUL (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: AURA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; REGN is a mid-cap deep-value stock; OCUL is a small-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. REGN, JPM pay a dividend while AURA, IMVT, OCUL 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.