Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
CRDF vs NKTR vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
CRDF vs NKTR vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $109M | $1.16B | $355.22B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $525K | $56M | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-45M | $-158M | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | -21.5% | 99.4% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | -90.3% | -224.9% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 25.2x |
| Total Debt | $832K | $149M | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $17M | $15M | $10.27B |
CRDF vs NKTR vs KO — 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% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CRDF vs NKTR vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CRDF is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 2.30
- Rev growth -13.2%, EPS growth 27.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.4%
NKTR is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.61, current ratio 4.97x
- Beta 1.61, current ratio 4.97x
- Beta 1.61 vs CRDF's 2.30
KO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for long-term compounding.
- 120.9% 10Y total return vs NKTR's -73.6%
- 1.9% revenue growth vs NKTR's -43.9%
- 27.8% margin vs CRDF's -85.3%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 1.9% revenue growth vs NKTR's -43.9% | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs CRDF's -85.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 1.61 vs CRDF's 2.30 | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield; 56-year raise streak; the other 2 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +5.2% vs CRDF's -58.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs CRDF's -71.5%, ROIC 15.8% vs -118.9% |
CRDF vs NKTR vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CRDF vs NKTR vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 3 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO is the larger business by revenue, generating $49.3B annually — 93874.3x CRDF's $525,000. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CRDF's -85.3%. On growth, KO holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $525,000 | $56M | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$46M | -$124M | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$45M | -$158M | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$37M | -$204M | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -21.5% | +99.4% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -90.3% | -2.2% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -85.3% | -2.8% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -71.4% | -3.7% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -62.4% | +3.8% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +35.7% | +49.7% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CRDF and NKTR and KO each lead in 1 of 3 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $109M | $1.2B | $355.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $92M | $1.3B | $390.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -2.30x | -6.09x | 27.15x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 25.24x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 26.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 183.32x | 20.95x | 7.41x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 2.34x | 11.12x | 10.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 67.07x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
KO delivers a 41.1% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $41 in annual profit, vs $-96 for CRDF. CRDF carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NKTR's 1.66x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs NKTR's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -95.5% | -87.0% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -71.5% | -40.7% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -118.9% | -57.2% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -75.8% | -55.7% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 2 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.02x | 1.66x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$17M | $134M | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $17M | $15M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $832,000 | $149M | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -4.15x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
NKTR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in KO five years ago would be worth $16,364 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $2,018 for CRDF. Over the past 12 months, NKTR leads with a +520.0% total return vs CRDF's -58.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors NKTR at 90.6% vs CRDF's -0.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -40.2% | +36.4% | +20.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -58.9% | +520.0% | +17.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -1.9% | +592.5% | +46.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -79.8% | -77.6% | +63.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.5% | -73.6% | +120.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -0.6% | +90.6% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.15 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CRDF's 2.30 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 98.2% from its 52-week high vs CRDF's 34.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 2.23x | 1.50x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $4.56 | $109.00 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.36 | $7.99 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +34.9% | +54.3% | +98.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 42.1 | 23.3 | 65.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.1M | 994K | 12.6M |
Analyst Outlook
KO leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: CRDF as "Buy", NKTR as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 152.7% upside for NKTR (target: $150) vs 4.6% for KO (target: $86). KO is the only dividend payer here at 2.47% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $2.00 | $149.60 | $86.29 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 14 | 33 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). NKTR leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
CRDF vs NKTR vs KO: Key Questions Answered
9 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CRDF or NKTR or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger pick with 1.
9% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -43. 9% for Nektar Therapeutics (NKTR). The Coca-Cola Company (KO) offers the better valuation at 27. 1x trailing P/E (25. 2x 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 is the better long-term investment — CRDF or NKTR or KO?
Over the past 5 years, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) delivered a total return of +63.
6%, compared to -79. 8% for Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: KO returned +121. 1% 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.
03Which is safer — CRDF or NKTR or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Cardiff Oncology, Inc. 's 2. 23β — meaning CRDF is approximately -1214% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Cardiff Oncology, Inc. (CRDF) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 166% for Nektar Therapeutics — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
04Which is growing faster — CRDF or NKTR or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is pulling ahead at 1.
9% versus -43. 9% for Nektar Therapeutics (NKTR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Cardiff Oncology, Inc. grew EPS 27. 4% 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.
05Which has better profit margins — CRDF or NKTR or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -77. 3% for Cardiff Oncology, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: KO leads at 28. 7% 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.
06Is CRDF or NKTR or KO more undervalued right now?
Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for NKTR: 152.
7% to $149. 60.
07Which pays a better dividend — CRDF or NKTR or KO?
In this comparison, KO (2.
5% yield) pays a dividend. CRDF, NKTR do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
08Is CRDF or NKTR or KO better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0.
20), 2. 5% yield, +121. 1% 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 (KO: +121. 1%, 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.
09What are the main differences between CRDF and NKTR and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (CRDF (Healthcare) and NKTR (Healthcare) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
KO pays a dividend while CRDF, NKTR 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.