Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Banks - Diversified
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Banks - Diversified | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $271M | $6.75B | $3.08B | $491M | $429M | $875.80B | $355.22B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $416M | $0.00 | $182M | $280.33B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-19M | $-506M | $-2M | $-175M | $20M | $57.05B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | — | — | 90.9% | — | 41.2% | 60.0% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | — | — | 0.8% | — | 14.0% | 25.9% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 122.5x | — | 17.4x | 14.1x | 25.2x |
| Total Debt | $719K | $72K | $6M | $27M | $12M | $942.38B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $30M | $902M | $43M | $83M | $75M | $343.34B | $10.27B |
EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM 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% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 138.1 | +38.1% |
| 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 | 341.0 | +241.0% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM vs KO
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%
IMVT doesn't hold a clear category lead here; it's more of a secondary option in this specific comparison.
ARQT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 91.3%, EPS growth 88.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 367.3%
- 91.3% revenue growth vs EQ's -100.0%
In this particular matchup, CABA is outpaced on most metrics by others in the set.
KMDA is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 1.29, yield 2.9%
- Beta 1.29, yield 2.9%, current ratio 4.07x
- 2.9% yield, vs KO's 2.5%, (4 stocks pay no dividend)
JPM is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 454.4% 10Y total return vs IMVT's 230.5%
- PEG 1.08 vs KO's 2.26
- Lower P/E (14.1x vs 25.2x), PEG 1.08 vs 2.26
KO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 27.8% margin vs ARQT's -0.6%
- 13.1% ROA vs CABA's -96.5%, ROIC 15.8% vs -429.6%
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 25.2x), PEG 1.08 vs 2.26 | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs ARQT's -0.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.50 vs CABA's 2.18, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, vs KO's 2.5%, (4 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +6.3% vs KMDA's +10.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs CABA's -96.5%, ROIC 15.8% vs -429.6% |
EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM vs KO — 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 vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 7 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories
EQ leads 1 • IMVT leads 0 • ARQT leads 0 • CABA leads 0 • KMDA leads 0 • JPM leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — ARQT and KO each lead in 2 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. 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 | $0 | $416M | $0 | $182M | $280.3B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$20M | -$532M | $6M | -$178M | $41M | $81.4B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$19M | -$506M | -$2M | -$175M | $20M | $57.0B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$19M | -$407M | $27M | -$143M | $17M | $100.9B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | — | +90.9% | — | +41.2% | +60.0% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | — | +0.8% | — | +14.0% | +25.9% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | — | -0.6% | — | +11.2% | +20.4% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | — | +6.5% | — | +9.1% | +36.0% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +60.1% | — | +2.8% | — | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +77.0% | -14.1% | +55.0% | +46.6% | 0.0% | +16.0% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — KMDA and JPM each lead in 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 15.6x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 42% valuation discount to KO's 27.1x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), JPM offers better value at 1.20x vs KO's 2.43x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $271M | $6.8B | $3.1B | $491M | $429M | $875.8B | $355.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $241M | $5.8B | $3.0B | $435M | $365M | $1.47T | $390.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -7.21x | -11.87x | -189.15x | -1.84x | 20.11x | 15.64x | 27.15x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 122.45x | — | 17.40x | 14.08x | 25.24x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — | 1.20x | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | 8.88x | 18.11x | 26.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | — | 8.18x | — | 2.38x | 3.13x | 7.41x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 9.03x | 7.04x | 16.51x | 2.75x | 1.61x | 2.42x | 10.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | 25.34x | 8.68x | 67.07x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 5 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 $-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), KO scores 7/9 vs CABA's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -61.4% | -68.2% | -1.4% | -131.6% | +7.7% | +15.9% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -53.7% | -62.2% | -0.6% | -96.5% | +5.4% | +1.3% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -88.8% | — | -5.2% | -4.3% | +9.9% | +4.5% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -98.1% | -68.3% | -4.3% | -126.2% | +8.0% | +8.9% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.03x | 0.00x | 0.03x | 0.24x | 0.04x | 2.60x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$30M | -$902M | -$37M | -$56M | -$64M | $599.0B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $30M | $902M | $43M | $83M | $75M | $343.3B | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $719,000 | $72,000 | $6M | $27M | $12M | $942.4B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | — | 2.08x | -73.78x | 26.87x | 0.74x | 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 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% | +20.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +628.0% | +103.6% | +79.1% | +72.0% | +10.6% | +19.1% | +17.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +295.8% | +51.6% | +140.8% | -75.6% | +49.4% | +133.1% | +46.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -54.2% | +207.0% | -13.3% | -64.8% | +33.7% | +110.0% | +63.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -79.9% | +230.5% | +12.8% | -69.9% | +112.7% | +454.4% | +120.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +58.2% | +14.9% | +34.0% | -37.5% | +14.3% | +32.6% | +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 CABA's 2.18 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 CABA's 71.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.58x | 1.66x | 1.45x | 2.02x | 1.28x | 0.94x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.43 | $36.27 | $31.77 | $4.23 | $9.35 | $337.25 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.27 | $14.32 | $12.72 | $1.26 | $6.50 | $262.71 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +81.9% | +90.6% | +77.4% | +71.2% | +79.6% | +93.0% | +98.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.5 | 51.9 | 59.9 | 36.6 | 31.5 | 54.8 | 65.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 559K | 1.9M | 1.5M | 3.6M | 46K | 7.0M | 12.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KMDA and KO 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", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 442.5% upside for CABA (target: $16) vs 4.6% for KO (target: $86). 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 | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $6.25 | $43.67 | $34.00 | $16.33 | $11.00 | $338.78 | $86.29 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 23 | 12 | 12 | 6 | 61 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +2.9% | +1.9% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | 1 | 0 | 15 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $0.21 | $5.95 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +3.9% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Risk & Volatility). EQ leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
EQ vs IMVT vs ARQT vs CABA vs KMDA vs JPM vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EQ or IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA or JPM 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). 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 or KO?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 15. 6x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 1x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 1x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: JPMorgan Chase & Co. wins at 1. 08x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EQ or IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA or JPM or KO?
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 +465. 8% 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 or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Cabaletta Bio, Inc. 's 2. 02β — meaning CABA is approximately -1107% more volatile than KO 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 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 IMVT or ARQT or CABA or KMDA or JPM 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: KO leads at 28. 7% 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 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, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 08x versus The Coca-Cola Company's 2. 26x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) trades at 14. 1x forward P/E versus 122. 5x for Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. — 108. 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 or KO?
In this comparison, KMDA (2.
9% yield), KO (2. 5% 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 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). Cabaletta Bio, Inc. (CABA) carries a higher beta of 2. 02 — 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%, 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 and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (EQ (Healthcare) and IMVT (Healthcare) and ARQT (Healthcare) and CABA (Healthcare) and KMDA (Healthcare) and JPM (Financial Services) 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; 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; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. KMDA, JPM, KO 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.