Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AMGN scored 58.7, NBIX scored 87.2 — NBIX leads.
Compare another set
AMGN
Amgen Inc.
Drug Manufacturers - General · Quality-Growth
58.7
$414.87 · $224.3B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
28.5
NBIX leads
NBIX
Neurocrine Biosciences, Inc.
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic · Quality-Growth
87.2
$142.44 · $14.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestNBIX20.9x
Fastest growthNBIX+34.4%
Strongest balance sheetNBIX0.12
Highest qualityNBIX80 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueNBIX-24%
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)
AMGN
stronger →← stronger
NBIX
76
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
80
65
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
96
40
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
86
NBIX is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
AMGN
NBIX
$10.2bA-
FCF
$870mC+
+9.1%B
Rev
+34.4%A
4.90D
D/E
0.12B+
25.8xB
P/E
20.9xB+
2.46C
PEG
0.28A
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
AMGN
NBIX
36% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
24% below
~14%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~7%/yr
-30%
1-yr DCF upside
+5%
-27%
5-yr DCF upside
+32%
-21%
10-yr DCF upside
+85%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
AMGN
Why this score
Raising its dividend
NBIX
Why this score
Durable high returns
Diluting shareholders
The companies
AMGNAmgen Inc.
Drug Manufacturers - General · $414.87 · beta 0.41
Why now
Drug Manufacturers - General · market cap $224.3b. 7% off the 52-week high of $447.03. 29 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $395.25 (implying -5% upside).
Moat
Net margin 23% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 75% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 116% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
D/E 4.90 is elevated — limits strategic flexibility and raises refinancing exposure if rates stay higher for longer. Trial-readout binary — late-stage clinical trials carry approve/reject outcomes that swing valuation 30%+; the equity is effectively a portfolio of these binary events, not a steady cash-flow business.
Drug Manufacturers - Specialty & Generic · market cap $14.5b. Down 23% from 52-week high of $186.12 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +34% — in hypergrowth territory. PEG 0.28 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 29 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $207.29 (implying +46% upside).
Moat
Net margin 21% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 19% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 123% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Trial-readout binary — late-stage clinical trials carry approve/reject outcomes that swing valuation 30%+; the equity is effectively a portfolio of these binary events, not a steady cash-flow business.
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 AMGN and NBIX diverge
On the headline score the gap is 28.5 points in favor of NBIX. The widest single difference is Value, where NBIX leads by 45.5 points.
ValueAMGN 40.5 · NBIX 86.0NBIX +45.5
GrowthAMGN 65.4 · NBIX 95.9NBIX +30.5
QualityAMGN 76.4 · NBIX 80.5NBIX +4.1
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value 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.
Common questions
Is NBIX or AMGN the better stock?
NBIX scores higher: NBIX 87.2, AMGN 58.7 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do NBIX and AMGN differ most?
The widest gap is value, where NBIX leads by 46 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. NBIX leads all three pillars, so the gap is broad rather than a single-measure difference.
How are NBIX and AMGN scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.