Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
EVMN vs IMVT vs ARDX vs PRAX vs ABBV vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Drug Manufacturers - General
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
EVMN vs IMVT vs ARDX vs PRAX vs ABBV vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Drug Manufacturers - General | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $625M | $6.90B | $1.40B | $7.70B | $402.80B | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $13M | $0.00 | $428M | $0.00 | $61.16B | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-69M | $-506M | $-58M | $-327M | $4.23B | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | 89.3% | — | 91.9% | — | 70.2% | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | -6.2% | — | -8.7% | — | 26.7% | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | — | 16.0x | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $2M | $72K | $212M | $110K | $69.07B | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $44M | $902M | $68M | $357M | $5.23B | $10.27B |
EVMN vs IMVT vs ARDX vs PRAX vs ABBV vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Oct 20 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 77.1 | -22.9% |
| Ardelyx, Inc. (ARDX) | 100 | 444.5 | +344.5% |
| Praxis Precision Me… (PRAX) | 100 | 50.8 | -49.2% |
| AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) | 100 | 267.6 | +167.6% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 171.9 | +71.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: EVMN vs IMVT vs ARDX vs PRAX vs ABBV vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
EVMN ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 85.7%, EPS growth 4.0%
- 85.7% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0%
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 237.9% 10Y total return vs ABBV's 362.2%
ARDX doesn't hold a clear category lead here; it's more of a secondary option in this specific comparison.
PRAX is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 1.55, Low D/E 0.0%, current ratio 10.22x
- +491.9% vs EVMN's +2.0%
ABBV carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and defensive.
- Dividend streak 43 yrs, beta 0.14, yield 2.9%
- Beta 0.14, yield 2.9%, current ratio 0.67x
- Lower P/E (16.0x vs 25.3x)
- Beta 0.14 vs IMVT's 1.66
KO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 27.8% margin vs EVMN's -5.3%
- 13.1% ROA vs IMVT's -62.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 85.7% revenue growth vs PRAX's -100.0% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (16.0x vs 25.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs EVMN's -5.3% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.14 vs IMVT's 1.66 | |
| Dividends | 2.9% yield, 43-year raise streak, vs KO's 2.5%, (4 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +491.9% vs EVMN's +2.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs IMVT's -62.2% |
EVMN vs IMVT vs ARDX vs PRAX vs ABBV 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.
EVMN vs IMVT vs ARDX vs PRAX vs ABBV vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 6 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ABBV leads in 1 of 6 categories
PRAX leads 1 • KO leads 1 • EVMN leads 0 • IMVT leads 0 • ARDX leads 0 • 3 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
Evenly matched — ARDX and ABBV and KO each lead in 2 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ABBV and PRAX 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 EVMN's -5.3%. On growth, ARDX holds the edge at +27.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $13M | $0 | $428M | $0 | $61.2B | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$80M | -$532M | -$35M | -$357M | $24.5B | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$69M | -$506M | -$58M | -$327M | $4.2B | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$77M | -$407M | -$37M | -$283M | $18.7B | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +89.3% | — | +91.9% | — | +70.2% | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -6.2% | — | -8.7% | — | +26.7% | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -5.3% | — | -13.6% | — | +6.9% | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -5.9% | — | -8.8% | — | +30.6% | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | — | +27.5% | — | +10.0% | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +38.8% | -14.1% | +11.8% | +2.7% | +57.4% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
ABBV leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 27.2x trailing earnings, KO trades at a 72% valuation discount to ABBV's 96.1x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, ABBV's 16.5x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than KO's 26.4x.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $625M | $6.9B | $1.4B | $7.7B | $402.8B | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $583M | $6.0B | $1.5B | $7.3B | $466.6B | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -9.10x | -12.14x | -21.88x | -19.77x | 96.09x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | — | 15.96x | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | — | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | — | — | 16.53x | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 48.09x | — | 3.43x | — | 6.59x | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 3.04x | 7.19x | 8.21x | 6.83x | — | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | — | 22.61x | 67.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
Evenly matched — IMVT and 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 $-2 for EVMN. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x 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 IMVT's 2/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -2.2% | -68.2% | -38.1% | -43.0% | +62.1% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -59.7% | -62.2% | -11.8% | -40.2% | +3.1% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -61.9% | — | -10.7% | -65.0% | +23.9% | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -63.6% | -68.3% | -10.6% | -49.3% | +21.5% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.00x | 1.27x | 0.00x | — | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$42M | -$902M | $144M | -$357M | $63.8B | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $44M | $902M | $68M | $357M | $5.2B | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $2M | $72,000 | $212M | $110,000 | $69.1B | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -10043.71x | — | -0.28x | — | 3.28x | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
PRAX leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in IMVT five years ago would be worth $31,304 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $8,580 for PRAX. Over the past 12 months, PRAX leads with a +491.9% total return vs EVMN's +2.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors PRAX at 164.8% vs EVMN's 0.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +14.6% | +29.8% | -7.5% | -6.9% | +0.8% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +2.0% | +110.9% | +53.0% | +491.9% | +21.9% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.0% | +55.0% | +42.6% | +1757.4% | +79.3% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.0% | +213.0% | +207.6% | -14.2% | +123.7% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +2.0% | +237.9% | +162.2% | -36.1% | +362.2% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +0.6% | +15.7% | +12.6% | +164.8% | +21.5% | +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 IMVT's 1.66 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 EVMN's 59.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.63x | 1.66x | 1.01x | 1.55x | 0.14x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $33.20 | $36.27 | $8.40 | $366.52 | $244.81 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $13.88 | $14.32 | $3.49 | $37.19 | $181.73 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +59.7% | +92.7% | +67.7% | +72.7% | +93.0% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 41.3 | 57.9 | 45.0 | 31.9 | 62.8 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 358K | 1.9M | 3.4M | 396K | 4.6M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Evenly matched — ABBV and KO each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: EVMN as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", ARDX as "Buy", PRAX as "Buy", ABBV as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 198.8% upside for ARDX (target: $17) vs 4.2% for KO (target: $86). 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 | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $48.40 | $43.67 | $17.00 | $607.15 | $256.92 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 3 | 23 | 16 | 16 | 41 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +2.9% | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | 43 | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $6.57 | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% | +0.2% |
ABBV leads in 1 of 6 categories (Valuation Metrics). PRAX leads in 1 (Total Returns). 3 tied.
EVMN vs IMVT vs ARDX vs PRAX vs ABBV vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is EVMN or IMVT or ARDX or PRAX or ABBV or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Evommune, Inc.
(EVMN) is the stronger pick with 85. 7% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). The Coca-Cola Company (KO) offers the better valuation at 27. 2x trailing P/E (25. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Evommune, Inc. (EVMN) a "Buy" — based on 3 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 — EVMN or IMVT or ARDX or PRAX or ABBV or KO?
On trailing P/E, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the cheapest at 27.
2x versus AbbVie Inc. at 96. 1x. On forward P/E, AbbVie Inc. is actually cheaper at 16. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — EVMN or IMVT or ARDX or PRAX or ABBV or KO?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +213. 0%, compared to -14. 2% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ABBV returned +362. 2% versus PRAX's -36. 1%. 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 — EVMN or IMVT or ARDX or PRAX or ABBV or KO?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the lower-risk stock at -0.
20β versus Immunovant, Inc. 's 1. 66β — meaning IMVT is approximately -928% 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 133% for The Coca-Cola Company — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — EVMN or IMVT or ARDX or PRAX or ABBV or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Evommune, Inc.
(EVMN) is pulling ahead at 85. 7% versus -100. 0% for Praxis Precision Medicines, Inc. (PRAX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: The Coca-Cola Company grew EPS 23. 6% year-over-year, compared to -52. 9% for Ardelyx, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ARDX leads at 98. 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.
06Which has better profit margins — EVMN or IMVT or ARDX or PRAX or ABBV or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -529. 8% for Evommune, 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 -623. 6% for EVMN. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — ARDX leads at 89. 5%, 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 EVMN or IMVT or ARDX or PRAX or ABBV or KO more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, AbbVie Inc.
(ABBV) trades at 16. 0x forward P/E versus 25. 3x for The Coca-Cola Company — 9. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for ARDX: 198. 8% to $17. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — EVMN or IMVT or ARDX or PRAX or ABBV or KO?
In this comparison, ABBV (2.
9% yield), KO (2. 5% yield) pay a dividend. EVMN, IMVT, ARDX, PRAX do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is EVMN or IMVT or ARDX or PRAX or ABBV 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). Evommune, Inc. (EVMN) carries a higher beta of 1. 63 — 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%, EVMN: +2. 0%), 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 EVMN and IMVT and ARDX and PRAX and ABBV and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (EVMN (Healthcare) and IMVT (Healthcare) and ARDX (Healthcare) and PRAX (Healthcare) and ABBV (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: EVMN is a small-cap high-growth stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ARDX is a small-cap high-growth stock; PRAX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; ABBV is a large-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. ABBV, KO pay a dividend while EVMN, IMVT, ARDX, PRAX 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.