Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
EQ vs ARQT vs ABBV vs AMGN vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Drug Manufacturers - General
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
EQ vs ARQT vs ABBV vs AMGN vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Drug Manufacturers - General | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $271M | $3.05B | $402.80B | $191.70B | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $416M | $61.16B | $37.24B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-19M | $-2M | $4.23B | $7.80B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | — | 90.9% | 70.2% | 71.5% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | — | 0.8% | 26.7% | 31.6% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | 122.5x | 16.0x | 15.9x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $719K | $6M | $69.07B | $54.60B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $30M | $43M | $5.23B | $9.13B | $10.27B |
EQ vs ARQT vs ABBV vs AMGN vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jun 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Equillium, Inc. (EQ) | 100 | 95.3 | -4.7% |
| Arcutis Biotherapeu… (ARQT) | 100 | 80.6 | -19.4% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 232.0 | +132.0% |
| Amgen Inc. (AMGN) | 100 | 150.6 | +50.6% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EQ vs ARQT vs ABBV vs AMGN vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EQ ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.58, Low D/E 2.5%, current ratio 10.32x
- +6.3% vs KO's +17.2%
ARQT is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.
- Rev growth 91.3%, EPS growth 88.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 367.3%
- 91.3% revenue growth vs EQ's -100.0%
ABBV has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 43 yrs, beta 0.14, yield 2.9%
- 362.2% 10Y total return vs AMGN's 178.4%
- Beta 0.14, yield 2.9%, current ratio 0.67x
- Beta 0.14 vs ARQT's 1.45
AMGN is the clearest fit if your priority is value.
- Lower P/E (15.9x vs 122.5x)
KO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 2.26 vs AMGN's 5.39
- 27.8% margin vs ARQT's -0.6%
- 13.1% ROA vs EQ's -53.7%, ROIC 15.8% vs -88.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 91.3% revenue growth vs EQ's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (15.9x vs 122.5x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs ARQT's -0.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.14 vs ARQT's 1.45 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, 43-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +6.3% vs KO's +17.2% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs EQ's -53.7%, ROIC 15.8% vs -88.8% |
EQ vs ARQT vs ABBV vs AMGN vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
EQ vs ARQT vs ABBV vs AMGN vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
AMGN leads in 1 of 6 categories
EQ leads 1 • KO leads 1 • ARQT leads 0 • ABBV leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — ARQT and ABBV each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABBV and EQ operate at a comparable scale, with $61.2B and $0 in trailing revenue. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to ARQT's -0.6%. On growth, ARQT holds the edge at +60.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $416M | $61.2B | $37.2B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$20M | $6M | $24.5B | $15.6B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$19M | -$2M | $4.2B | $7.8B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$19M | $27M | $18.7B | $8.6B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +90.9% | +70.2% | +71.5% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +0.8% | +26.7% | +31.6% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | -0.6% | +6.9% | +20.9% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +6.5% | +30.6% | +23.1% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +60.1% | +10.0% | +5.8% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +77.0% | +55.0% | +57.4% | +4.4% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
AMGN leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 25.0x trailing earnings, AMGN trades at a 74% valuation discount to ABBV's 96.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), KO offers better value at 2.43x vs AMGN's 8.49x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $271M | $3.0B | $402.8B | $191.7B | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $241M | $3.0B | $466.6B | $237.2B | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -7.21x | -187.54x | 96.09x | 24.96x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 122.45x | 15.96x | 15.87x | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 8.49x | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 16.53x | 14.97x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 8.11x | 6.59x | 5.22x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 9.03x | 16.37x | — | 22.24x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 22.61x | 23.67x | 67.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — ABBV and KO each lead in 3 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 $-61 for EQ. EQ carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to AMGN's 6.31x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), AMGN scores 7/9 vs EQ's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -61.4% | -1.4% | +62.1% | +89.4% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -53.7% | -0.6% | +3.1% | +8.6% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -88.8% | -5.2% | +23.9% | +14.8% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -98.1% | -4.3% | +21.5% | +16.0% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.03x | 0.03x | — | 6.31x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$30M | -$37M | $63.8B | $45.5B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $30M | $43M | $5.2B | $9.1B | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $719,000 | $6M | $69.1B | $54.6B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 2.08x | 3.28x | 5.02x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
EQ leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in ABBV five years ago would be worth $22,367 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,691 for EQ. Over the past 12 months, EQ leads with a +627.0% total return vs KO's +17.2%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EQ at 58.2% vs KO's 13.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +83.7% | -15.9% | +0.8% | +10.0% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +627.0% | +80.6% | +21.9% | +22.8% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +295.8% | +138.8% | +79.3% | +76.2% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -53.1% | -16.2% | +123.7% | +65.2% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -79.9% | +11.8% | +362.2% | +178.4% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +58.2% | +33.7% | +21.5% | +20.8% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
KO leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
KO is the less volatile stock with a -0.20 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ARQT's 1.45 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. KO currently trades 98.3% from its 52-week high vs ARQT's 76.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.58x | 1.45x | 0.14x | 0.53x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.43 | $31.77 | $244.81 | $391.29 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.27 | $12.72 | $181.73 | $267.83 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +81.9% | +76.7% | +93.0% | +90.8% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 56.7 | 66.4 | 62.8 | 61.2 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 565K | 1.5M | 4.6M | 2.4M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ABBV and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EQ as "Buy", ARQT as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", AMGN as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 122.4% upside for EQ (target: $6) vs -1.8% for AMGN (target: $349). For income investors, ABBV offers the higher dividend yield at 2.89% vs KO's 2.46%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $6.25 | $34.00 | $256.92 | $348.80 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 12 | 41 | 38 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | +2.9% | +2.7% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | 43 | 15 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | $6.57 | $9.45 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
AMGN leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). EQ leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
EQ vs ARQT vs ABBV vs AMGN vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EQ or ARQT or ABBV or AMGN or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(ARQT) is the stronger pick with 91. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Equillium, Inc. (EQ). Amgen Inc. (AMGN) offers the better valuation at 25. 0x trailing P/E (15. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Equillium, Inc. (EQ) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — EQ or ARQT or ABBV or AMGN or KO?
On trailing P/E, Amgen Inc.
(AMGN) is the cheapest at 25. 0x versus AbbVie Inc. at 96. 1x. On forward P/E, Amgen Inc. is actually cheaper at 15. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: The Coca-Cola Company wins at 2. 26x versus Amgen Inc. 's 5. 39x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EQ or ARQT or ABBV or AMGN or KO?
Over the past 5 years, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) delivered a total return of +123. 7%, compared to -53. 1% for Equillium, Inc. (EQ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABBV returned +362. 2% versus EQ's -79. 9%. 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 — EQ or ARQT or ABBV or AMGN or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. 's 1. 45β — meaning ARQT is approximately -823% more volatile than KO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Equillium, Inc. (EQ) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 6% for Amgen Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EQ or ARQT or ABBV or AMGN or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc.
(ARQT) is pulling ahead at 91. 3% versus -100. 0% for Equillium, Inc. (EQ). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. grew EPS 88. 8% year-over-year, compared to -69. 6% for Equillium, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ARQT leads at 367. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — EQ or ARQT or ABBV or AMGN or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -4. 3% for Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. — meaning it keeps 27. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: ABBV leads at 32. 8% versus -3. 3% for ARQT. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ARQT leads at 90. 2%, 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 EQ or ARQT or ABBV or AMGN or KO 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, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 2. 26x versus Amgen Inc. 's 5. 39x. Both stocks trade at elevated growth-adjusted valuations, so expected growth needs to materialise. On forward earnings alone, Amgen Inc. (AMGN) trades at 15. 9x forward P/E versus 122. 5x for Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. — 106. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for EQ: 122. 4% to $6. 25.
08Which pays a better dividend — EQ or ARQT or ABBV or AMGN or KO?
In this comparison, ABBV (2.
9% yield), AMGN (2. 7% yield), KO (2. 5% yield) pay a dividend. EQ, ARQT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is EQ or ARQT or ABBV or AMGN 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). Both have compounded well over 10 years (KO: +121. 1%, ARQT: +11. 8%), 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 EQ and ARQT and ABBV and AMGN and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (EQ (Healthcare) and ARQT (Healthcare) and ABBV (Healthcare) and AMGN (Healthcare) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: EQ is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ARQT is a small-cap high-growth stock; ABBV is a large-cap quality compounder stock; AMGN is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. ABBV, AMGN, KO pay a dividend while EQ, ARQT 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.