Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
EQ vs KMDA vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
EQ vs KMDA vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $271M | $429M | $355.22B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $182M | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-19M | $20M | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | — | 41.2% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | — | 14.0% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | 17.4x | 25.2x |
| Total Debt | $719K | $12M | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $30M | $75M | $10.27B |
EQ vs KMDA 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% |
| Kamada Ltd. (KMDA) | 100 | 95.9 | -4.1% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 184.9 | +84.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EQ vs KMDA vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EQ is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.50, Low D/E 2.5%, current ratio 10.32x
- Beta 0.50 vs KMDA's 1.29, lower leverage
- +6.3% vs KMDA's +10.6%
KMDA has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 0 yrs, beta 1.29, yield 2.9%
- Rev growth 12.1%, EPS growth 48.0%, 3Y rev CAGR 11.7%
- Beta 1.29, yield 2.9%, current ratio 4.07x
KO is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 120.9% 10Y total return vs KMDA's 112.7%
- 27.8% margin vs EQ's 2.6%
- 13.1% ROA vs EQ's -53.7%, ROIC 15.8% vs -88.8%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 12.1% revenue growth vs EQ's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (17.4x vs 25.2x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs EQ's 2.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.50 vs KMDA's 1.29, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, vs KO's 2.5%, (1 stock pays no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +6.3% vs KMDA's +10.6% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs EQ's -53.7%, ROIC 15.8% vs -88.8% |
EQ vs KMDA vs KO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
EQ vs KMDA 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 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO and EQ operate at a comparable scale, with $49.3B and $0 in trailing revenue. KO is the more profitable business, keeping 27.8% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to KMDA's 11.2%. On growth, KO holds the edge at +12.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $182M | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$20M | $41M | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$19M | $20M | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$19M | $17M | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | — | +41.2% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | — | +14.0% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | — | +11.2% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | — | +9.1% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +2.8% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +77.0% | 0.0% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
KMDA leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 20.1x trailing earnings, KMDA trades at a 26% valuation discount to KO's 27.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, KMDA's 8.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than KO's 26.4x.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $271M | $429M | $355.2B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $241M | $365M | $390.4B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -7.21x | 20.11x | 27.15x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 17.40x | 25.24x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 8.88x | 26.36x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | — | 2.38x | 7.41x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 9.03x | 1.61x | 10.39x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | 25.34x | 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 $-61 for EQ. EQ carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to KO's 1.33x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs EQ's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -61.4% | +7.7% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -53.7% | +5.4% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -88.8% | +9.9% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -98.1% | +8.0% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.03x | 0.04x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$30M | -$64M | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $30M | $75M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $719,000 | $12M | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | 26.87x | 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 KO five years ago would be worth $16,364 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $4,584 for EQ. 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 KO's 13.7% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +83.7% | +9.4% | +20.2% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +628.0% | +10.6% | +17.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +295.8% | +49.4% | +46.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -54.2% | +33.7% | +63.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -79.9% | +112.7% | +120.9% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +58.2% | +14.3% | +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 KMDA's 1.29 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 KMDA's 79.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.58x | 1.28x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $3.43 | $9.35 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.27 | $6.50 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +81.9% | +79.6% | +98.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 53.5 | 31.5 | 65.7 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 559K | 46K | 12.6M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — KMDA and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EQ as "Buy", KMDA as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 122.4% upside for EQ (target: $6) vs 4.6% for KO (target: $86). For income investors, KMDA offers the higher dividend yield at 2.88% vs KO's 2.47%.
| Metric | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $6.25 | $11.00 | $86.29 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 6 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +2.9% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.21 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). KMDA leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
EQ vs KMDA vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EQ or KMDA or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Kamada Ltd.
(KMDA) is the stronger pick with 12. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Equillium, Inc. (EQ). Kamada Ltd. (KMDA) offers the better valuation at 20. 1x trailing P/E (17. 4x 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 KMDA or KO?
On trailing P/E, Kamada Ltd.
(KMDA) is the cheapest at 20. 1x versus The Coca-Cola Company at 27. 1x. On forward P/E, Kamada Ltd. is actually cheaper at 17. 4x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EQ or KMDA or KO?
Over the past 5 years, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) delivered a total return of +63.
6%, compared to -54. 2% for Equillium, Inc. (EQ). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: KO returned +121. 1% 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 KMDA or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Kamada Ltd. 's 1. 28β — meaning KMDA is approximately -742% 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 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EQ or KMDA or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Kamada Ltd.
(KMDA) is pulling ahead at 12. 1% versus -100. 0% for Equillium, Inc. (EQ). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Kamada Ltd. grew EPS 48. 0% year-over-year, compared to -69. 6% for Equillium, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, KMDA leads at 11. 7% 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 KMDA or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus 0. 0% for Equillium, 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 0. 0% for EQ. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — KO leads at 61. 6%, 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 KMDA or KO more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Kamada Ltd.
(KMDA) trades at 17. 4x forward P/E versus 25. 2x for The Coca-Cola Company — 7. 8x 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 KMDA or KO?
In this comparison, KMDA (2.
9% yield), KO (2. 5% yield) pay a dividend. EQ does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is EQ or KMDA 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%, EQ: -79. 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 KMDA and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (EQ (Healthcare) and KMDA (Healthcare) and KO (Consumer Defensive)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
KMDA, KO pay a dividend while EQ does 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.