Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. ARGX scored 77.2, KRYS scored 70.7 — ARGX leads.
Compare another set
Different reporting periods. KRYS's fundamentals are as of June 2026, but ARGX's are as of December 2025 — a 6-month gap. Growth, margin and valuation figures below therefore describe different windows and aren't strictly like-for-like.
ARGX
argenx SE
Biotechnology · Quality-Growth
77.2
$825.03 · $51.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
6.5
ARGX leads
KRYS
Krystal Biotech, Inc.
Biotechnology · Quality-Growth
70.7
$331.61 · $9.8B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestARGX31.4x
Fastest growthARGX+89.9%
Strongest balance sheetARGX0.01
Highest qualityARGX72 / 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)
ARGX
stronger →← stronger
KRYS
72
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
70
98
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
91
65
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
55
ARGX is stronger on 3 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
ARGX
KRYS
$679mC+
FCF
$258mC
+89.9%A
Rev
+22.6%A-
0.01A
D/E
0.01A
31.4xB
P/E
41.6xC
1.00B+
PEG
2.10C
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
ARGX
KRYS
229% above
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
77% above
~47%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~28%/yr
-77%
1-yr DCF upside
-55%
-70%
5-yr DCF upside
-43%
-55%
10-yr DCF upside
-22%
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
ARGX
KRYS
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
The companies
ARGXargenx SE
Biotechnology · $825.03 · beta -0.04
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $51.9b. Down 23% from 52-week high of $1072.75 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +90% — in hypergrowth territory. 23 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $1,154 (implying +40% upside).
Moat
Net margin 31% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 18% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. $51.9b market cap gives the company enough scale to absorb fixed costs that subscale competitors can't, without yet being so large that growth has to come from acquisition.
Risk
Trailing P/E 31x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 12.5x embeds aggressive forward growth — disappointing top-line guidance would compress the multiple hard. 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.
KRYSKrystal Biotech, Inc.
Biotechnology · $331.61 · beta 0.50
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $9.8b. 13% off the 52-week high of $382.54. Revenue growing +23%, comfortably above the S&P median. 9 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $392.11 (implying +18% upside).
Moat
Net margin 55% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 18% is above 15% — 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.
Risk
Trailing P/E 42x sits well above the S&P median (~20x) — multiple compression is a real risk if revenue growth decelerates. P/S 22.3x 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 ARGX and KRYS diverge
On the headline score the gap is 6.5 points in favor of ARGX. The widest single difference is Value, where ARGX leads by 9.8 points.
ValueARGX 65.1 · KRYS 55.3ARGX +9.8
GrowthARGX 98.0 · KRYS 91.1ARGX +6.9
QualityARGX 72.1 · KRYS 70.2level
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 ARGX or KRYS the better stock?
ARGX scores higher: ARGX 77.2, KRYS 70.7 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 ARGX and KRYS differ most?
The widest gap is value, where ARGX leads by 10 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. ARGX also leads growth, while quality is effectively level between them.
How are ARGX and KRYS 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.