COMPARE · Data as of August 24, 2026
ALNY vs KRYS
Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ALNY scored 74.9, KRYS scored 63.3 — ALNY leads.
Compare another set
ALNY
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
74.9
$240.43 · $32.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
11.6
ALNY leads
KRYS
Krystal Biotech, Inc.
63.3
$353.13 · $10.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
- CheapestALNY41.9x
- Fastest growthALNY+65.2%
- Strongest balance sheetKRYS0.01
- Highest qualityKRYS72 / 100
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
ALNY
stronger →← stronger
KRYS
67
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
72
99
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
92
64
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
39
ALNY is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ALNY
KRYS
$465mC
FCF
$258mC
+65.2%A
Rev
+22.6%A-
2.21D
D/E
0.01A
41.9xC
P/E
44.3xC
0.45A
PEG
2.20C
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
ALNY
KRYS
194% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
22% above
~44%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~16%/yr
-74%
1-yr DCF upside
-34%
-66%
5-yr DCF upside
-18%
-49%
10-yr DCF upside
+14%
These two disagree on this pair: the Value pillar ranks cheapness against sector peers, while price-vs-fair-value is an absolute read. A name can be the better value in its sector and still the dearer one on cash flows.
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
ALNY
Why this score
- Diluting shareholders
KRYS
Why this score
- Diluting shareholders
The companies
ALNYAlnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $32.2b. Down 51% from 52-week high of $495.55 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +65% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.45 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 26 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $370.20 (implying +54% upside).
Moat
Net margin 20% beats the market median by a meaningful margin — the company is keeping more of every revenue dollar than the average S&P constituent. ROE 54% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. Pharma moat is patent runway + pipeline depth — a single approved molecule funds the next generation of bets. Late-stage trials carry binary readouts that swing valuation 30%+.
Risk
D/E 2.21 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Down 51% from the 52-week high — the market is pricing in something the screen can't see; verify the bear case before sizing up. Trailing P/E 42x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates.
KRYSKrystal Biotech, Inc.
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $10.5b. 8% off the 52-week high of $382.54. Revenue growing +23%, comfortably above the S&P median. 8 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $385.00 (implying +9% upside).
Moat
Net margin 55% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 18% sits above Buffett's preferred 15% threshold — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 107% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash, a sign that working capital and capex are well-disciplined.
Risk
Trailing P/E 44x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 23.7x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard. Patent cliff exposure — a single approved molecule can carry the company; when patent protection expires, generic / biosimilar competition can erase 80% of the revenue in 2-3 years.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where ALNY and KRYS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 11.6 points in favor of ALNY. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
- ValueALNY 63.8 · KRYS 38.7ALNY +25.1
- GrowthALNY 98.5 · KRYS 91.8ALNY +6.7
- QualityALNY 66.8 · KRYS 71.6KRYS +4.8
Pillars run 0–100 against sector peers, so a score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.