Evotec vs HUTCHMED (China)
EVO and HCM side by side, both in drugs. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How EVO and HCM compare
Evotec grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (−1.1% versus −13.0% for HUTCHMED (China)).
HUTCHMED (China) scores higher on the StockData Score (5 against 4 for Evotec), 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 | EVO | HCM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Share price | $1.69 | $15.08 |
| Change, 1 year | −43.5% | −0.03% |
| Change, 5 years | −92.9% | −50.9% |
| Beta (5Y) | 1.26 | 0.97 |
| Employees | 4,553 | 109 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 4 | 5 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 1 (better) | 0 |
| Performance score | 0 | 3 (better) |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 2 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | −1.1% (better) | −13.0% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.5% | 19.2% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 1111% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 1200% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 14.5% | 38.7% (better) |
| Operating margin | −7.1% (better) | −7.1% |
| Net margin | – | 83.3% |
| FCF margin | −10.4% (better) | −14.4% |
| Return on equity | – | 36.7% |
| Return on invested capital | −7.7% | – |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.10 | 0.09 (better) |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −7.79 | – |
| Interest coverage | – | −13.7× |
| Current ratio | 2.07 | 5.64 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | – | 4 |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 1.8% | 0.51% |
| Held by insiders | 17.1% | 0.44% |
Go deeper
- EVO stock overview
- EVO income statement
- EVO valuation and score
- HCM stock overview
- HCM income statement
- HCM valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.