Puma Biotechnology vs Rigel Pharmaceuticals
PBYI and RIGL side by side, both in drugs. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How PBYI and RIGL compare
Rigel Pharmaceuticals is the larger company, worth 2.1 times as much as Puma Biotechnology ($831M against $401M).
On earnings, Rigel Pharmaceuticals is cheaper: it trades at 2.9× trailing earnings, against 16.9× for Puma Biotechnology.
Puma Biotechnology grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (9.4% versus 2.2% for Rigel Pharmaceuticals).
Rigel Pharmaceuticals keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 107% compared with 10.3% at Puma Biotechnology.
Puma Biotechnology scores higher on the StockData Score (14 against 11 for Rigel Pharmaceuticals), 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 | PBYI | RIGL |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $401M | $831M |
| Share price | $7.77 | $44.46 |
| Change, 1 year | 55.7% | 11.3% |
| Change, 5 years | 127% | 45.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.97 | 1.08 |
| Employees | 179 | 174 |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 14 (better) | 11 |
| Valuation score | 2 | 3 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 5 (better) | 4 |
| Health score | 5 (better) | 3 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 0 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 16.9× | 2.9× (better) |
| P/S | 1.7× (better) | 2.9× |
| P/B | 2.7× | 1.9× (better) |
| EV/EBITDA | 8.3× (better) | 9.2× |
| P/FCF | 8.7× | – |
| FCF yield | 11.5% | – |
| Fair value | $8.76 | – |
| Margin of safety | 11.3% | – |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 9.4% (better) | 2.2% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 0.29% | 22.1% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −35.6% | 171% (better) |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −37.8% | 147% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 73.6% | 89.6% (better) |
| Operating margin | 11.3% | 26.3% (better) |
| Net margin | 10.3% | 107% (better) |
| FCF margin | 19.9% | – |
| Return on equity | 18.2% | 109% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 38.7% | 46.4% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.00 | – |
| Net debt / EBITDA | −2.77 | – |
| Interest coverage | 12.9× | 18.2× (better) |
| Current ratio | 3.03 (better) | 2.39 |
| Altman Z-score | −2.31 | 4.98 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 7 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 74.9% | 87.7% |
| Held by insiders | 18.9% | 3.3% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$2.0M | −$306K (better) |
| Short interest, % of float | 10.3% | 14.0% |
Go deeper
- PBYI stock overview
- PBYI income statement
- PBYI valuation and score
- RIGL stock overview
- RIGL income statement
- RIGL valuation and score
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.