Liquidia vs United Therapeutics
LQDA and UTHR side by side, both in drugs. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How LQDA and UTHR compare
United Therapeutics is the larger company, worth 6.4 times as much as Liquidia ($25.7B against $4.0B).
On earnings, United Therapeutics is cheaper: it trades at 21.4× trailing earnings, against 32.4× for Liquidia.
Liquidia grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (2234% versus 2.5% for United Therapeutics).
United Therapeutics keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 41.6% compared with 30.7% at Liquidia.
United Therapeutics scores higher on the StockData Score (10 against 8 for Liquidia), 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 | LQDA | UTHR |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $4.0B | $25.7B |
| Share price | $45.06 | $598.72 |
| Change, 1 year | 101% | 31.5% |
| Change, 5 years | 991% | 196% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.93 | 0.54 |
| Employees | 216 | 1,400 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 8 | 10 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 3 | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 32.4× | 21.4× (better) |
| P/S | 8.9× | 8.1× (better) |
| P/B | 20.7× | 4.0× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 22.1× | 15.4× (better) |
| P/FCF | 26.8× | 23.5× (better) |
| PEG | – | 0.93 |
| FCF yield | 3.7% | 4.3% (better) |
| Fair value | $32.03 | $477.00 |
| Margin of safety | −40.7% | −25.5% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 2234% (better) | 2.5% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 192% (better) | 16.5% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 5.5% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 9.0% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 19.3% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | – | 86.1% |
| Operating margin | 37.4% | 44.4% (better) |
| Net margin | 30.7% | 41.6% (better) |
| FCF margin | 33.4% | 34.6% (better) |
| Return on equity | 132% (better) | 19.3% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 29.7% |
| Financial health | ||
| Interest coverage | 6.3× | 117× (better) |
| Current ratio | 2.31 | 5.73 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 8.57 | 22.13 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 4 | 8 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Buyback yield | – | 9.7% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 9.7% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 81.1% | 97.4% |
| Held by insiders | 20.2% | 5.9% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$221M (better) | −$1.3B |
| Short interest, % of float | 17.7% | 8.9% |
Go deeper
- LQDA stock overview
- LQDA income statement
- LQDA valuation and score
- UTHR stock overview
- UTHR income statement
- UTHR valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.