Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Banks - Diversified
EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $271M | $6.75B | $3.08B | $491M | $429M | $875.80B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $416M | $0.00 | $182M | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-19M | $-506M | $-2M | $-175M | $20M | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | — | — | 90.9% | — | 41.2% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | — | — | 0.8% | — | 14.0% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 123.5x | — | 17.4x | 14.1x |
| Total Debt | $719K | $72K | $6M | $27M | $12M | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $30M | $902M | $43M | $83M | $75M | $343.34B |
EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM — 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% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 136.8 | +36.8% |
| Arcutis Biotherapeu… (ARQT) | 100 | 80.6 | -19.4% |
| Cabaletta Bio, Inc. (CABA) | 100 | 27.0 | -73.0% |
| Kamada Ltd. (KMDA) | 100 | 95.9 | -4.1% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 318.2 | +218.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EQ has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.50, Low D/E 2.5%, current ratio 10.32x
- Beta 0.50 vs CABA's 2.18, lower leverage
- +6.3% vs KMDA's +10.6%
Among these 6 stocks, IMVT doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
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%
CABA doesn't hold a clear category lead here; it's more of a secondary option in this specific comparison.
KMDA is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if defensive is your priority.
- Beta 1.29, yield 2.9%, current ratio 4.07x
- 2.9% yield, vs JPM's 1.9%, (4 stocks pay no dividend)
- 5.4% ROA vs CABA's -96.5%, ROIC 9.9% vs -429.6%
JPM ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and long-term compounding.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.95, yield 1.9%
- 454.4% 10Y total return vs IMVT's 230.5%
- Lower P/E (14.1x vs 17.4x)
- 20.4% margin vs ARQT's -0.6%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 91.3% revenue growth vs EQ's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (14.1x vs 17.4x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.4% margin vs ARQT's -0.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.50 vs CABA's 2.18, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, vs JPM's 1.9%, (4 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +6.3% vs KMDA's +10.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.4% ROA vs CABA's -96.5%, ROIC 9.9% vs -429.6% |
EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA 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.
Segment breakdown not available.
EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 6 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KMDA leads in 2 of 6 categories
JPM leads 1 • EQ leads 1 • IMVT leads 0 • ARQT leads 0 • CABA leads 0 • 2 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 CABA 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 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 | $0 | $416M | $0 | $182M | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$20M | -$532M | $6M | -$178M | $41M | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$19M | -$506M | -$2M | -$175M | $20M | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$19M | -$407M | $27M | -$143M | $17M | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | — | +90.9% | — | +41.2% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | — | +0.8% | — | +14.0% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | — | -0.6% | — | +11.2% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | — | +6.5% | — | +9.1% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +60.1% | — | +2.8% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +77.0% | -14.1% | +55.0% | +46.6% | 0.0% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
KMDA leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.6x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 22% valuation discount to KMDA's 20.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, KMDA's 8.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than JPM's 18.1x.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $271M | $6.8B | $3.1B | $491M | $429M | $875.8B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $241M | $5.8B | $3.0B | $435M | $365M | $1.47T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -7.21x | -11.87x | -189.15x | -1.84x | 20.11x | 15.64x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 123.51x | — | 17.40x | 14.08x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — | 1.20x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | 8.88x | 18.11x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | — | 8.18x | — | 2.38x | 3.13x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 9.03x | 7.04x | 16.51x | 2.75x | 1.61x | 2.42x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | 25.34x | 8.68x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KMDA 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 $-132 for CABA. 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), KMDA scores 6/9 vs CABA's 1/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -61.4% | -68.2% | -1.4% | -131.6% | +7.7% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -53.7% | -62.2% | -0.6% | -96.5% | +5.4% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -88.8% | — | -5.2% | -4.3% | +9.9% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -98.1% | -68.3% | -4.3% | -126.2% | +8.0% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.03x | 0.00x | 0.03x | 0.24x | 0.04x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$30M | -$902M | -$37M | -$56M | -$64M | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $30M | $902M | $43M | $83M | $75M | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $719,000 | $72,000 | $6M | $27M | $12M | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | 2.08x | -73.78x | 26.87x | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
EQ 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 $30,700 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,516 for CABA. Over the past 12 months, EQ leads with a +628.0% total return vs KMDA's +10.6%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors EQ at 58.2% vs CABA's -37.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +83.7% | +26.9% | -15.2% | +36.2% | +9.4% | -2.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +628.0% | +103.6% | +79.1% | +72.0% | +10.6% | +19.1% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +295.8% | +51.6% | +140.8% | -75.6% | +49.4% | +133.1% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -54.2% | +207.0% | -13.3% | -64.8% | +33.7% | +110.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -79.9% | +230.5% | +12.8% | -69.9% | +112.7% | +454.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +58.2% | +14.9% | +34.0% | -37.5% | +14.3% | +32.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — EQ and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
EQ is the less volatile stock with a 0.50 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CABA's 2.18 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JPM currently trades 93.0% from its 52-week high vs CABA's 71.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.50x | 1.67x | 1.49x | 2.18x | 1.29x | 0.95x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.43 | $36.27 | $31.77 | $4.23 | $9.35 | $337.25 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.27 | $14.32 | $12.72 | $1.26 | $6.50 | $262.71 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +81.9% | +90.6% | +77.4% | +71.2% | +79.6% | +93.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.5 | 51.9 | 59.9 | 36.6 | 31.5 | 54.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 559K | 1.9M | 1.5M | 3.6M | 46K | 7.0M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KMDA and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EQ as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", ARQT as "Buy", CABA as "Buy", KMDA as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 442.5% upside for CABA (target: $16) vs 8.1% for JPM (target: $339). For income investors, KMDA offers the higher dividend yield at 2.88% vs JPM's 1.90%.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $6.25 | $43.67 | $34.00 | $16.33 | $12.00 | $338.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 23 | 12 | 12 | 6 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +2.9% | +1.9% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 1 | 0 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $0.21 | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.9% |
KMDA leads in 2 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics, Profitability & Efficiency). JPM leads in 1 (Income & Cash Flow). 2 tied.
EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EQ or IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA or JPM 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). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 15. 6x trailing P/E (14. 1x 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 IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA or JPM?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 15. 6x versus Kamada Ltd. at 20. 1x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 1x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EQ or IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +207. 0%, compared to -64. 8% for Cabaletta Bio, Inc. (CABA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +454. 4% 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 IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Equillium, Inc.
(EQ) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 50β versus Cabaletta Bio, Inc. 's 2. 18β — meaning CABA is approximately 337% more volatile than EQ 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 — EQ or IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA or JPM?
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 IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA or JPM?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 4% net margin versus -4. 3% for Arcutis Biotherapeutics, 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 -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 IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA or JPM more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) trades at 14. 1x forward P/E versus 123. 5x for Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. — 109. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CABA: 442. 5% to $16. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — EQ or IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA or JPM?
In this comparison, KMDA (2.
9% yield), JPM (1. 9% yield) pay a dividend. EQ, IMVT, ARQT, CABA do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is EQ or IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA 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. 95), 1. 9% yield, +454. 4% 10Y return). Cabaletta Bio, Inc. (CABA) carries a higher beta of 2. 18 — 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: +454. 4%, CABA: -69. 9%), 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 IMVT and ARQT and CABA and KMDA and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (EQ (Healthcare) and IMVT (Healthcare) and ARQT (Healthcare) and CABA (Healthcare) and KMDA (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: EQ is a small-cap quality compounder stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ARQT is a small-cap high-growth stock; CABA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; KMDA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. KMDA, JPM pay a dividend while EQ, IMVT, ARQT, CABA 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.