COMPARE · Data as of August 21, 2026

AUPH vs INVA

Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. AUPH scored 72.6, INVA scored 68.6 — AUPH leads.
Compare another set
AUPH
Aurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Biotechnology · Quality-Growth
72.6
$16.65 · $2.2B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
4.0
AUPH leads
INVA
Innoviva, Inc.
Biotechnology · Quality-Growth
68.6
$21.07 · $1.5B
fundamentals as of
  • CheapestINVA4.9x
  • Fastest growthAUPH+20.4%
  • Strongest balance sheetAUPH0.10
  • Highest qualityAUPH74 / 100
  • Largest discount to fair valueINVA-59%
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD72.6/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY74.0GROWTH60.3VALUE85.7
THE BULL RANKINGS SCORECARD68.6/ 100 · BULL SCOREPEER MEDIANQUALITY69.0GROWTH49.2VALUE95.2
AUPHINVAQuality74.069.0Growth60.349.2Value85.795.2
cheap & fastrevenue growth →← cheaper (lower multiple)9%30%0.0x12xAUPHINVA

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.

FCFAUPH$175mINVA$189m
RevAUPH+20.4%INVA+18.8%
D/EAUPH0.10INVA0.27
P/EAUPH7.3xINVA4.9x
PEGAUPH0.58INVA0.31
AUPH
stronger →← stronger
INVA
74
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
69
60
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
49
86
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
95
AUPH is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
AUPH
INVA
$175mC
FCF
$189mC
+20.4%A-
Rev
+18.8%B+
0.10B+
D/E
0.27B
7.3xA
P/E
4.9xA
0.58A-
PEG
0.31A
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.
AUPH
INVA
9% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
59% below
~6%/yr
Growth the price implies10-yr FCF · lower = less priced in
~-11%/yr
-3%
1-yr DCF upside
+106%
+10%
5-yr DCF upside
+142%
+30%
10-yr DCF upside
+205%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
AUPH
Why this score
  • Earnings outpace cash
INVA
Why this score
  • Diluting shareholders
AUPHAurinia Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Biotechnology · $16.65 · beta 1.40
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $2.2b. 14% off the 52-week high of $19.25. Revenue growing +20%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.58 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 6 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $18.17 (implying +9% upside).
Moat
ROE 51% — 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
Beta 1.40 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return. 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.
INVAInnoviva, Inc.
Biotechnology · $21.07 · beta 0.34
Why now
Biotechnology · market cap $1.5b. 16% off the 52-week high of $25.15. Revenue growing +19%, comfortably above the S&P median. PEG 0.31 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 4 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $35.00 (implying +66% upside).
Moat
Net margin 81% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 29% — 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
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.
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 AUPH and INVA diverge

On the headline score the gap is 4.0 points in favor of AUPH. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.

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.