Biotechnology
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
IMA vs PRTA vs FOLD vs IMVT vs KO
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Biotechnology
Beverages - Non-Alcoholic
IMA vs PRTA vs FOLD vs IMVT vs KO — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Biotechnology | Beverages - Non-Alcoholic |
| Market Cap | $61M | $432M | $4.55B | $6.90B | $355.61B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $0.00 | $58M | $634M | $0.00 | $49.28B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-45M | $-151M | $-27M | $-506M | $13.70B |
| Gross Margin | -29.1% | 46.8% | 87.9% | — | 61.7% |
| Operating Margin | -60.6% | -217.9% | 5.2% | — | 29.3% |
| Forward P/E | — | 176.7x | 40.6x | — | 25.3x |
| Total Debt | $10M | $14M | $483M | $72K | $45.49B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $35M | $308M | $214M | $902M | $10.27B |
IMA vs PRTA vs FOLD vs IMVT vs KO — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Mar 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| ImageneBio Inc (IMA) | 100 | 1.6 | -98.4% |
| Prothena Corporatio… (PRTA) | 100 | 32.8 | -67.2% |
| Amicus Therapeutics… (FOLD) | 100 | 146.4 | +46.4% |
| Immunovant, Inc. (IMVT) | 100 | 209.6 | +109.6% |
| The Coca-Cola Compa… (KO) | 100 | 156.7 | +56.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: IMA vs PRTA vs FOLD vs IMVT vs KO
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
IMA ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.83, Low D/E 7.5%, current ratio 12.49x
- Beta 0.83, current ratio 12.49x
PRTA lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
FOLD is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and growth exposure is your priority.
- beta 0.48
- Rev growth 20.0%, EPS growth 51.2%, 3Y rev CAGR 24.4%
- 20.0% revenue growth vs PRTA's -92.8%
- Beta 0.48 vs IMVT's 1.66
IMVT is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding.
- 237.9% 10Y total return vs FOLD's 147.3%
KO carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for value and quality.
- Better valuation composite
- 27.8% margin vs IMA's -56.7%
- 2.5% yield; 56-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
- 13.1% ROA vs IMVT's -62.2%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 20.0% revenue growth vs PRTA's -92.8% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 27.8% margin vs IMA's -56.7% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.48 vs IMVT's 1.66 | |
| Dividends | 2.5% yield; 56-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +134.8% vs IMA's -67.0% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 13.1% ROA vs IMVT's -62.2% |
IMA vs PRTA vs FOLD vs IMVT 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.
IMA vs PRTA vs FOLD vs IMVT vs KO — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories
IMVT leads 1 • IMA leads 0 • PRTA leads 0 • FOLD leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
KO and IMVT 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 IMA's -56.7%. On growth, PRTA holds the edge at +17.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $0 | $58M | $634M | $0 | $49.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$53M | -$124M | $40M | -$532M | $15.5B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$45M | -$151M | -$27M | -$506M | $13.7B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$52M | -$81M | $30M | -$407M | $12.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | -29.1% | +46.8% | +87.9% | — | +61.7% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -60.6% | -2.2% | +5.2% | — | +29.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -56.7% | -2.6% | -4.3% | — | +27.8% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -59.8% | -140.6% | +4.7% | — | +25.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | — | +17.1% | +23.7% | — | +12.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -4.3% | +153.6% | -89.0% | -14.1% | +18.2% |
Valuation Metrics
KO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, KO's 26.4x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than FOLD's 114.9x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $61M | $432M | $4.5B | $6.9B | $355.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $36M | $138M | $4.8B | $6.0B | $390.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.50x | -1.82x | -164.85x | -12.14x | 27.18x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 176.66x | 40.62x | — | 25.27x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | — | 2.43x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | — | 114.88x | — | 26.39x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 76.54x | 44.60x | 7.17x | — | 7.42x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.20x | 1.58x | 16.29x | 7.19x | 10.40x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | 152.43x | — | 67.15x |
Profitability & Efficiency
KO leads this category, winning 6 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 $-68 for IMVT. IMVT carries lower financial leverage with a 0.00x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to FOLD's 1.76x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), KO scores 7/9 vs PRTA's 1/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -35.2% | -49.9% | -12.0% | -68.2% | +41.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -31.3% | -42.3% | -3.2% | -62.2% | +13.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -35.9% | -21.0% | +5.3% | — | +15.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -35.6% | -47.0% | +5.1% | -68.3% | +17.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.08x | 0.05x | 1.76x | 0.00x | 1.33x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$25M | -$294M | $269M | -$902M | $35.2B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $35M | $308M | $214M | $902M | $10.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $10M | $14M | $483M | $72,000 | $45.5B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | -560.22x | — | 1.00x | — | 10.70x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
IMVT leads this category, winning 5 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 $330 for IMA. Over the past 12 months, FOLD leads with a +134.8% total return vs IMA's -67.0%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors IMVT at 15.7% vs IMA's -59.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -19.7% | -10.3% | +1.5% | +29.8% | +20.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -67.0% | +62.7% | +134.8% | +110.9% | +17.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -93.3% | -88.7% | +11.6% | +55.0% | +47.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -96.7% | -82.7% | +35.2% | +213.0% | +65.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.6% | -82.0% | +147.3% | +237.9% | +121.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -59.4% | -51.7% | +3.7% | +15.7% | +13.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — FOLD and KO each lead in 1 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. FOLD currently trades 99.9% from its 52-week high vs IMA's 30.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.83x | 1.50x | 0.48x | 1.66x | -0.20x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $18.00 | $11.80 | $14.50 | $36.27 | $84.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $1.36 | $4.95 | $5.51 | $14.32 | $65.35 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +30.2% | +69.9% | +99.9% | +92.7% | +98.3% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 51.8 | 35.6 | 72.2 | 57.9 | 60.6 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 432K | 447K | 2.3M | 1.9M | 12.7M |
Analyst Outlook
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: PRTA as "Buy", FOLD as "Buy", IMVT as "Buy", KO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 130.3% upside for PRTA (target: $19) vs 0.1% for FOLD (target: $15). KO is the only dividend payer here at 2.46% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $19.00 | $14.50 | $43.67 | $86.13 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 28 | 24 | 23 | 48 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +2.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | — | — | — | 56 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $2.04 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +0.2% |
KO leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). IMVT leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
IMA vs PRTA vs FOLD vs IMVT vs KO: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is IMA or PRTA or FOLD or IMVT or KO a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Amicus Therapeutics, Inc.
(FOLD) is the stronger pick with 20. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -92. 8% for Prothena Corporation plc (PRTA). 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 Prothena Corporation plc (PRTA) a "Buy" — based on 28 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 — IMA or PRTA or FOLD or IMVT or KO?
On forward P/E, The Coca-Cola Company is actually cheaper at 25.
3x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — IMA or PRTA or FOLD or IMVT or KO?
Over the past 5 years, Immunovant, Inc.
(IMVT) delivered a total return of +213. 0%, compared to -96. 7% for ImageneBio Inc (IMA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: IMVT returned +237. 9% versus IMA's -98. 6%. 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 — IMA or PRTA or FOLD or IMVT 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 176% for Amicus Therapeutics, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — IMA or PRTA or FOLD or IMVT or KO?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Amicus Therapeutics, Inc.
(FOLD) is pulling ahead at 20. 0% versus -92. 8% for Prothena Corporation plc (PRTA). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Amicus Therapeutics, Inc. grew EPS 51. 2% year-over-year, compared to -954. 9% for ImageneBio Inc. Over a 3-year CAGR, FOLD leads at 24. 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 — IMA or PRTA or FOLD or IMVT or KO?
The Coca-Cola Company (KO) is the more profitable company, earning 27.
3% net margin versus -56. 7% for ImageneBio 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 -60. 6% for IMA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — FOLD leads at 87. 3%, 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 IMA or PRTA or FOLD or IMVT or KO more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, The Coca-Cola Company (KO) trades at 25.
3x forward P/E versus 176. 7x for Prothena Corporation plc — 151. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for PRTA: 130. 3% to $19. 00.
08Which pays a better dividend — IMA or PRTA or FOLD or IMVT or KO?
In this comparison, KO (2.
5% yield) pays a dividend. IMA, PRTA, FOLD, IMVT do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is IMA or PRTA or FOLD or IMVT 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). Prothena Corporation plc (PRTA) carries a higher beta of 1. 50 — 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%, PRTA: -82. 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 IMA and PRTA and FOLD and IMVT and KO?
These companies operate in different sectors (IMA (Healthcare) and PRTA (Healthcare) and FOLD (Healthcare) and IMVT (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: IMA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; PRTA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; FOLD is a small-cap high-growth stock; IMVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; KO is a large-cap quality compounder stock. KO pays a dividend while IMA, PRTA, FOLD, IMVT 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.