Biogen vs Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
BIIB and REGN side by side, both in drugs. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How BIIB and REGN compare
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals is the larger company, worth 2.5 times as much as Biogen ($95.5B against $37.5B).
On earnings, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals is cheaper: it trades at 20.5× trailing earnings, against 44.9× for Biogen.
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (18.6% versus 0.31% for Biogen).
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 28.5% compared with 8.3% at Biogen.
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals pays a dividend yielding 0.40%; Biogen does not pay one.
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals scores higher on the StockData Score (17 against 4 for Biogen), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | BIIB | REGN |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $37.5B | $95.5B |
| Share price | $253.62 | $927.89 |
| Change, 1 year | 71.5% | 42.1% |
| Change, 5 years | −9.0% | 51.7% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.51 | 0.64 |
| Employees | 7,500 | 15K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 4 | 17 (better) |
| Valuation score | 1 | 1 |
| Growth score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Performance score | 1 | 4 (better) |
| Health score | 2 | 6 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 44.9× | 20.5× (better) |
| P/S | 3.7× (better) | 5.7× |
| P/B | – | 2.9× |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.9× | 16.4× (better) |
| P/FCF | 13.9× (better) | 25.0× |
| PEG | – | 7.41 |
| FCF yield | 7.2% (better) | 4.0% |
| Fair value | $157.62 | $851.58 |
| Margin of safety | −60.9% | −9.0% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 0.31% | 18.6% (better) |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | −6.0% | 11.0% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −45.5% | 5.2% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −46.0% | 8.4% (better) |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −18.7% | 6.3% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 74.0% | – |
| Operating margin | – | 28.8% |
| Net margin | 8.3% | 28.5% (better) |
| FCF margin | 26.9% (better) | 22.6% |
| Return on equity | – | 14.9% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 16.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | – | 0.06 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | −1.36 |
| Interest coverage | – | 104× |
| Current ratio | 1.87 | 3.35 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.05 | 7.64 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 0.40% |
| Payout ratio | – | 8.0% |
| Buyback yield | – | 2.1% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 2.5% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 96.3% | 89.0% |
| Held by insiders | 0.21% | 3.8% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$905K (better) | −$8.7M |
| Superinvestors holding | 1 | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 4.0% | 2.2% |
Go deeper
- BIIB stock overview
- BIIB income statement
- BIIB valuation and score
- REGN stock overview
- REGN income statement
- REGN valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.