Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CRDF vs NKTR vs IMVT vs AGEN vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Banks - Diversified
CRDF vs NKTR vs IMVT vs AGEN vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $105M | $1.16B | $6.90B | $137M | $896.00B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $525K | $56M | $0.00 | $124M | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-45M | $-158M | $-506M | $65M | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | -21.5% | 99.4% | — | 52.1% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | -90.3% | -224.9% | — | 6.6% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 4.2x | 14.4x |
| Total Debt | $832K | $149M | $72K | $335M | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $17M | $15M | $902M | $3M | $343.34B |
CRDF vs NKTR vs IMVT vs AGEN vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cardiff Oncology, I… (CRDF) | 100 | 30.7 | -69.3% |
| Nektar Therapeutics (NKTR) | 100 | 17.1 | -82.9% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 138.1 | +38.1% |
| Agenus Inc. (AGEN) | 100 | 4.2 | -95.8% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CRDF vs NKTR vs IMVT vs AGEN vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CRDF lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
NKTR ranks third and is worth considering specifically for defensive.
- Beta 1.50, current ratio 4.97x
- +5.8% vs CRDF's -59.4%
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
AGEN carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 10.4%, EPS growth 100.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 5.2%
- 10.4% revenue growth vs NKTR's -43.9%
- Lower P/E (4.2x vs 14.4x)
- 52.2% margin vs CRDF's -85.3%
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%
- Beta 0.94 vs AGEN's 2.26
- 1.9% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 10.4% revenue growth vs NKTR's -43.9% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (4.2x vs 14.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 52.2% margin vs CRDF's -85.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.94 vs AGEN's 2.26 | |
| Dividends | 1.9% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +5.8% vs CRDF's -59.4% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 31.0% ROA vs CRDF's -71.5% |
CRDF vs NKTR vs IMVT vs AGEN vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
CRDF vs NKTR vs IMVT vs AGEN 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 3 of 6 categories
AGEN leads 2 • NKTR leads 1 • CRDF leads 0 • IMVT leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
AGEN 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. AGEN is the more profitable business, keeping 52.2% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRDF's -85.3%. On growth, AGEN holds the edge at +40.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $525,000 | $56M | $0 | $124M | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$46M | -$124M | -$532M | $16M | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$45M | -$158M | -$506M | $65M | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$37M | -$204M | -$407M | -$88M | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -21.5% | +99.4% | — | +52.1% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -90.3% | -2.2% | — | +6.6% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -85.3% | -2.8% | — | +52.2% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -71.4% | -3.7% | — | -70.7% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -62.4% | +3.8% | — | +40.2% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +35.7% | +49.7% | -14.1% | +199.0% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
AGEN leads this category, winning 3 of 4 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $105M | $1.2B | $6.9B | $137M | $896.0B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $89M | $1.3B | $6.0B | $469M | $1.50T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.23x | -6.10x | -12.14x | -970.59x | 16.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 4.20x | 14.40x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 0.90x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | 18.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 177.55x | 21.01x | — | 1.20x | 3.20x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.27x | 11.15x | 7.19x | — | 2.47x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | 8.88x |
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM leads this category, winning 4 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 $-96 for CRDF. 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), AGEN scores 5/9 vs IMVT's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -95.5% | -87.0% | -68.2% | — | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -71.5% | -40.7% | -62.2% | +31.0% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -118.9% | -57.2% | — | — | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -75.8% | -55.7% | -68.3% | — | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 1.66x | 0.00x | — | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$17M | $134M | -$902M | $332M | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $17M | $15M | $902M | $3M | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $832,000 | $149M | $72,000 | $335M | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -4.15x | — | 1.41x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NKTR leads this category, winning 4 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 $321 for AGEN. Over the past 12 months, NKTR leads with a +577.9% total return vs CRDF's -59.4%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NKTR at 90.8% vs AGEN's -56.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -42.1% | +36.8% | +29.8% | +2.2% | -0.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -59.4% | +577.9% | +110.9% | -31.5% | +21.8% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -4.9% | +594.5% | +55.0% | -91.8% | +138.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -81.3% | -77.6% | +213.0% | -96.8% | +118.2% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.5% | -73.6% | +237.9% | -95.9% | +465.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -1.7% | +90.8% | +15.7% | -56.5% | +33.6% |
Risk & Volatility
JPM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
JPM is the less volatile stock with a 0.94 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than AGEN's 2.26 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 CRDF's 33.8% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.23x | 1.50x | 1.66x | 2.26x | 0.94x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.56 | $109.00 | $36.27 | $7.34 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.36 | $7.99 | $14.32 | $2.71 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +33.8% | +54.5% | +92.7% | +45.0% | +95.1% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 47.8 | 32.1 | 57.9 | 49.7 | 59.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 994K | 1.9M | 913K | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
JPM leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CRDF as "Buy", NKTR as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", AGEN as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 151.9% upside for NKTR (target: $150) vs 5.9% for JPM (target: $340). JPM is the only dividend payer here at 1.86% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $2.00 | $149.60 | $43.67 | $7.33 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 33 | 23 | 11 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | 1 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% | +3.9% |
JPM leads in 3 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Risk & Volatility). AGEN leads in 2 (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics).
CRDF vs NKTR vs IMVT vs AGEN vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CRDF or NKTR or IMVT or AGEN or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Agenus Inc.
(AGEN) is the stronger pick with 10. 4% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -43. 9% for Nektar Therapeutics (NKTR). 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 Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — CRDF or NKTR or IMVT or AGEN or JPM?
On forward P/E, Agenus Inc.
is actually cheaper at 4. 2x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CRDF or NKTR or IMVT or AGEN or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +213. 0%, compared to -96. 8% for Agenus Inc. (AGEN). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +465. 8% versus CRDF's -99. 5%. 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 — CRDF or NKTR or IMVT or AGEN or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 94β versus Agenus Inc. 's 2. 26β — meaning AGEN is approximately 139% more volatile than JPM 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 — CRDF or NKTR or IMVT or AGEN or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Agenus Inc.
(AGEN) is pulling ahead at 10. 4% versus -43. 9% for Nektar Therapeutics (NKTR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Agenus Inc. grew EPS 100. 0% year-over-year, compared to -12. 1% for Nektar Therapeutics. Over a 3-year CAGR, CRDF leads at 15. 4% 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 — CRDF or NKTR or IMVT or AGEN or JPM?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 4% net margin versus -77. 3% for Cardiff Oncology, Inc. — meaning it keeps 20. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 26. 0% versus -82. 6% for CRDF. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CRDF 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 CRDF or NKTR or IMVT or AGEN or JPM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Agenus Inc.
(AGEN) trades at 4. 2x forward P/E versus 14. 4x for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — 10. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NKTR: 151. 9% to $149. 60.
08Which pays a better dividend — CRDF or NKTR or IMVT or AGEN or JPM?
In this comparison, JPM (1.
9% yield) pays a dividend. CRDF, NKTR, IMVT, AGEN do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CRDF or NKTR or IMVT or AGEN or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 94), 1. 9% yield, +465. 8% 10Y return). Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF) carries a higher beta of 2. 23 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (JPM: +465. 8%, CRDF: -99. 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 CRDF and NKTR and IMVT and AGEN and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (CRDF (Healthcare) and NKTR (Healthcare) and IMVT (Healthcare) and AGEN (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: CRDF is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NKTR is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; AGEN is a small-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. JPM pays a dividend while CRDF, NKTR, IMVT, AGEN 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.